The only questions we must ask, is (This. Is. Philosophy.)

  1. What happens when we die?

  2. Why are we in this brain but not someone else’s brain. This is similar to the consciousness question but more advanced. The reason explanations for consciousness are unsatisfying is because it does not answer this hidden question.

All other things are basically unimportant.

It’s probably a matter of computerized response of having no viable alternate actions. MAD has been around a very long time now, and as it implies, it is mad, and the madness has been a built in feature by now. The indeterminacy has sunk to the very lowest common denominator , where, indetermine effects have caused the options likewise to eliminate the kind and number of available responses. If there was a more viable way to politically force the Koreans to cough up the money for the missles, they would take that route, after all, this is capitalism at its most obvious. In addition, in the opinion of those policy makers who augment simulated policy, it is worth it in terms of strategic value.

The Koreans likewise operate likewise, and predictably act in accordance with their most probable expectation of what they think the U S will do.

Sad, but true. The U S is captive to a minimal option scenario.

I think you posted in the wrong topic.

“in this brain” implies that we have some physical location inside a physical object. Is that what you’re trying to ask?

Localization, in mathematical space, is the relative position of objects.

Since our body seems to always follow us along, it is said that our bodies are localized, and we are our bodies. If our bodies suddenly walked away we would no longer be our bodies.
our minds always seem to be localized, we cannot escape our minds but we can escape our thoughts.

Question is, why am i in this body and not someone else’s body.

the body is real, even if life is fake and a simulation, because the body has persistent properties, therefore it is real.

Walked away, taking our eyes and nerves? What would that be like? I’m not sure that the question even makes sense… what are you that isn’t part of your body?

I believe we do have options. The Spaceport in the DPRK isn’t far from the Chinese boarders, if the Chinese can be persuaded by the rest of the countries in the region, they may station much cheaper missiles on their border for a preemptive strike capacity, as well as let a Aegis Anti-Missle ship patrol between South Korea and Dalian. But they will have to be REALLY UNNERVED by North Korea. They are not that shaken just yet.

Same can be set up between Japan.and North Korea, along disputed Islands, that both Korea’s and Japan claims. US is likely the only actor who can position themselves there without Japan or South Korea freaking out, to intercept missiles aimed at Japan.

But really… I’m far, far more interested in these lasers. I have no idea what their viable range is. I don’t know how great of a arc or tracking they have… does the whole contraption have to be a long and continuous straight barrel, or is it cords going to a nozel, and you can shoot in half-sphere, 360 degrees around and up? Can it hit a ICBM (tracking issues), are they strong enough to shoot some 80-100 miles up? I dunno.

Likewise, the air force has been testing the B-52 lasers… might be a good time to move the tests to Japan to increase a barrier. Any real chance in hell of hitting a ICBM? Depends on the trajectory… one with a very high arc… no. But hell, might nail one if it is almost horizontal.

Wish Korea would slap on a dollar tax for every smartphone it makes, and buy one of these THAAD systems each year so we can balance out a defensive grid to better protect Japan, Alaska, and Hawaii. Lasers (if they can shoot that far) would make much more sense on the Korean Peninsula. Getting China in on this is wise, it’s not impossible, they get regularly freaked out by North Korea too.

Dude, if you are real, that obviously means i can potentially be you, which means I am obviously not limited to this body. However, if solipism is true, and you are not real, then your argument makes sense.

Canada is real; could Canada be Switzerland? You can change what you call them… you seem to be thinking that the abstractions are more real or meaningful than the instantiations.

What you are saying doesnt make any sense. What does canada and switzerland have to do with anything? Talk about abstractions!

You said I can’t leave my body, but if you are real that means that I am already outside of my body in your consciousness.

This makes no sense at all and is as nonsensical as it gets with you Trixie so I hope this is not one of your serious threads

Ultimate Philosophy 1001"

How does knowing THIS serve us now? albeit it is a question which is on many minds.
It is a very interesting and I have no idea how far if at all science has come in explaining it. Religion certainly cannot.

You mean "Why is this brain in me and not in someone else?
We are a product of our ancestors, our family, our own individual human experience, how we tend to “see” and interpret our inner and outer world, our brain chemicals and how they unfold within each of us.

I think that sometimes when we ask this kind of question, it is coming from a more profound “personal” place within us – it perhaps deals more with our own sense of self and affirmation or rejection than with the neurological or biological (if that word enters into it). I know this from my own human experience though I’ve asked the question a bit different - why am I me and not someone else?

But your above question leads to the other important questions which are highly important philosophically and demand which seek or demand the truth -
Who am I, what is my purpose in life, what is my place in life, why do I feel as I do and not as others do, et cetera.
Universally speaking.

Without power to your neurons you can’t compute what happens anymore than a computer can calculate a math problem after it has been unplugged. So nothing.

Because there are no circuits connecting your brain to the other body. This is like asking “Why am I me and not you.” Because the definition of you is not someone else. Until two things can occupy the same space there’s no way you are going to be another thing at the same time as being yourself.

The reason explanations about consciousness are unsatisfying is because we are programmed to want to survive the same way eating cardboard is unsatisfying because you are programmed to want to eat pizza. That and consciousness comes so naturally that we are blind to the fact that we are incapable of using our consciousness to do anything besides contract muscles and even then it’s pretty hit or miss on how accurately you can throw a thing or how completely you can squeeze out a dump.

double post :frowning:

A thought about a dog is not a dog. You’re confusing concepts and referents.

there are different approaches to death and they all depend on metaphysics, how far we are willing to dig it. Studies about reincarnation for example have shown that many kids recall bits of their previous life until age 5 or even 7, especially those born in cultures that recognize reincarnation.

as for your 2nd question, does the mind matrix exist?

Trixie,

Do you know the saying, Trixie – to the effect – that you may think that the grass is greener on the other side until you find that you still have to mow the lawn. lol I’m paraphrasing a bit there. I typed that for a reason.

The man over there having an awareness of your existence in his consciousness, namely, in seeing you, does not have your consciousness or your self within his consciousness. You maintain your own consciousness and he maintains his though he is conscious of you. The more you and he discover about one another, the more conscious you are both about one another but yours isn’t there. I find it even silly to be typing this.

Can you even imagine what would happen if that were possible - for someone’s consciousness to enter into another’s consciousness? Might be some kind of an explosion or better still, implosion, considering all of the memories which both have experienced. Much of who we are is because of the memories which are lodged in our brains and how those memories have impacted our lives --our instincts, thoughts, beliefs, behavior, as a result of how our individual brains respond to and are continually transformed because of this.

Perhaps the problem here is with language, the way you’ve expressed yourself. We all express things differently.

You are not “in” someone else’s brain because you are “in” your own brain. The fact that you are already able to identify and call it “someone else’s brain” already answers your question. Your question basically answers itself, i.e. it is a stupid question.

As for [1], you can examine this through philosophy and eventually come upon the understanding that nothing “happens” when you die, basically “you” simply cease existing by being obliviated in toto as a consequence of the ceasing of all brain/body physiological activities.

Philosophy isn’t going to find an answer other than that. But if you’re not satisfied you can always try something non-philosophical, like religion or some new age spiritual stuff (i.e. ideology or fantasy-based believing).

It’s actually far more interesting to inquire into what are the effects and philosophical/psychological implications of the fact of in toto oblivion, meaning from where onto-epistemically does the fact of death in this manner arise and how, in those terms and under those forms is this fact, qua awareness and as reflected in knowledge and in or as the categories of our knowledge, is psyche shaped in accordance to this range of facts? Start engaging here and you’ll begin to develop some more truthful ideas, toward an actually existential understanding which is the higher basis of philosophy.

The “in” imagery is problematic I think. Not saying that you’re pushing that perspective but I think it’s useful to comment on it. You aren’t really “in” anything, you “are” those things, where “are” = the combination of the things that make up the idea of “you”.

Consciousness is weird because our brain is only smart enough to see things and make certain logical deductions, but not smart enough to understand itself. Humans are just eyes attached to a tumor that eats and shits. Whereas robots, when we invent artificial A.I will have a full understanding of how the logic of their intelligence works because unlike our creator we won’t make complicated shit without a user manual.

i think you want it to be nonsensical so you choose it to be. Your mind is limited by dasein, expand it and leave the dasein behnd and you will see what I am saying is absolute and makes sense.

If Carleas is real, then there is a Me inside of him, which implies i can leave my body. If carleas is not real and a p-zombie there is no me inside of him, therefore there is no reason to assume I can ever leave my body.

The “i” does not inherently exist so body switching should be fairly easy, unless solipsim is real.