The real question: does dualism undermine cryonics?
Not necessarily. It depends on the type of dualism.
If you adopt interactionist dualism
You might believe:
The mind interacts with the brain
The brain is still necessary for identity
Cryonics still preserves the “interface”
Cryonics remains relevant.
If you adopt substance dualism (mind ≠ body)
Then you might conclude:
The “real you” survives death anyway
Cryonics is unnecessary
This is the only scenario where you might leave cryonics. Even then, most cryonicists would simply shrug and say:
“If you think you have a soul, cryonics becomes optional.”
Rick updates to Rick+GeminiAI... "If you think you ARE a soul, acting through an avatar-brain-body (Donald Hoffman), cryonics becomes pointless"
REVIEW: Donald Hoffman, a cognitive psychologist with a strong background in mathematics and computer science, proposes a radical theory about the nature of reality. His core idea is that **what we perceive as the physical world is not fundamental reality itself, but rather a user interface, evolved for reproductive fitness, [same as guy on coast the other night with Connie Willis I think-rick] not for accurately representing the truth.** He calls this interface "fitness beats truth."
* So, what's behind the interface? Hoffman suggests that the "underlying code" is a complex, interconnected web of **conscious agents**[EXISTONS] interacting with each other. These agents are the fundamental building blocks of reality, replacing traditional concepts like particles and fields.
**4. Dying and Removing the "Goggles":**
* Here's where the "goggles" analogy comes in. The physical world, as we perceive it, is the "goggles" that filter our experience. Our brains, according to Hoffman, are not creating consciousness, but rather are interfaces that channel a particular stream of conscious experience within this larger network of conscious agents.
* **Death, in Hoffman's theory, is essentially removing the "goggles."** It's the termination of the specific interface that creates our individual perception of the physical world. Our individual stream of consciousness, however, doesn't necessarily cease to exist. It rejoins the larger network of conscious agents.
* What happens after death is speculative. Hoffman suggests that we might have access to a broader range of experiences and possibilities, unfiltered by the constraints of the physical interface. It could be like waking up from a dream and realizing the dream world was just a limited perspective.
* Offers a potential explanation for the hard problem of consciousness (how subjective experience arises from physical matter).
Donald Hoffman's theory presents a compelling and controversial view of reality. He argues that our perception of the physical world is a user interface evolved for fitness, not truth, and that underlying this interface is a network of interacting conscious agents. Death, in this framework, is the removal of the "goggles" of physical perception, potentially opening up access to a wider reality. While lacking direct empirical support and facing significant philosophical and scientific challenges, Hoffman's theory is a thought-provoking attempt to reconcile our understanding of consciousness, quantum physics, and evolution. It highlights the profound mysteries that still surround the nature of reality.
ON JESUS QUOTE:
What did Jesus mean by don't cast pearls before swine?
The phrase "Don't cast pearls before swine" comes from Jesus' teaching in the Gospel of Matthew 7:6, where He says:
*"Do not give what is holy to dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces."* (NKJV)
**Meaning:** v
Jesus is advising caution about sharing valuable, sacred, or profound truths—symbolized by "pearls"—with those who are unwilling or unable to appreciate them—represented by "swine." Pigs (swine) were considered unclean animals in Jewish culture, and pearls were precious and valuable. The imagery suggests that just as pigs would trample pearls without recognizing their value, some people might dismiss or disrespect spiritual wisdom or teachings if they're unreceptive. Moreover, it may even provoke a negative or hostile response.
**In practical terms:**
- Be discerning about whom you share deep spiritual insights or important truths with.
- Recognize that some audiences may reject or mock the message rather than understand or appreciate it.
- It’s a call to wise stewardship of teachings, avoiding needless conflict or harm.
In broader interpretation, it encourages wisdom in communication—knowing when and with whom to share certain things to ensure they are received with respect and understanding.
Rick adds: Jesus didn't have social media or publishing avail. to him so it's an outdated concept of selling. In our case, we can't help but cast pearls before everyone and have to tolerate swine since it's the only way to make the case available to the non-swine.
Responses