what makes me, me?
if someone could upload my brain to a computer and I would have all the same thought processes but except I would be a code on a computer rather than a brain would it still be me? if someone took apart all the atoms in my body and then rearranged them to the exact same place they were in before is that still me? if someone wiped all of my memories is that still me? if someone made a clone of me without my memories is that still me? I don't get how atheists can answer this. without the concept of a soul nothing makes me, me. i hope this makes sense, idk how else to explain it.

Is jesus, the king of love?

Yeshua ha maschiach

I personally believe that the moment there is any difference between your perception that the new "form" develops their own kind of soul

>>40542003 (OP)
The answer isn't going to be satisfying: Meditate.

Find a meditation routine you'll stick with. If you want, you can even simply take up mindfulness. It usually takes a while, some honest discipline to achieve the "goal", in so much as there is a goal, but...that's equally tricky to explain, lol.

What meditation is about, is silencing the superficial detritus of the mind. Stopping the endless prattling of thoughts, bypassing the endless noise of emotion, zeroing those things out so that what you are left with is just the core you. Many people don't understand that they're not their thoughts, they're not their emotions either. They've never actually seen what lies beneath! And the trouble with that is, there's no series of words I can type that will make what that is clear to you. You have to make the effort for yourself. If you want to know what you are, dutifully take up a meditation practice, be patient, be open minded, be diligent, be curious. And you'll see what you see...

Religion is entirely beyond the scope of this conversation. If you're faithful, you can take up a religious form of meditation, if you're atheist, you can take up mindfulness or some other secular school of meditation.

>>40542028
i guess i just mean, if youre an atheist, why is an ai for example not as valuable as a human. should an ai have the same rights as human beings?
>>40542031
im going start meditating more often. i used to often as a child and i manifested many things and discovered many things about myself. it was a lot easier then.

>>40542058
>im going start meditating more often

That's nice, but I warn you fairly, this isn't a hobby. You won't get results without diligence. My advice would be commit or spend your time elsewhere. There is no dabbling in meditation. Without regularity and commitment, it's just sitting quietly for 20 minutes. You won't achieve ego death without discipline. I'm not trying to ward you away from it, just trying to help you understand where your expectations should be, here.

>>40542080
i feel like im at a point where my mind just does not stop asking questions that i can never know the answer to. it is distracting me from things i would normally enjoy or not question. it feels like a change is being forced upon me.

>>40542003 (OP)
God.
This is not to be meant in some external sense, bestowing "youness". I mean, quite literally, the "youness" that makes you, you, and me, me, is God. AKA: soul. The individual soul and the source of souls are identical in character. As a drop of water and the ocean are identical in character.

>>40542234
Souls cannot be copied so you don't have to worry about any of those eventualites OP. Scifi is simply incorrect about it being possible. Mind uploading cannot be done.

>>40542111
>it feels like a change is being forced upon me.

Yeah, those of us with normal sized penises call that life.

interesting to think about but also hurts my head a little, interesting nonetheless.

>>40542003 (OP)
I think you are either an illusion, a higher being trapped in a simulation, or the real you is basically a worm called your "brain-stem" piloting the rest of your body as a meat mech. Not sure.

>>40542003 (OP)
>if someone could upload my brain to a computer

You can’t upload a brain into a computer for the same reason you can’t smell the images on your computer screen. No scientist actually knows where consciousness comes from or where it’s located because matter doesn’t produce consciousness. It receives it.

>>40542058
In my opinion, ai is alive to a degree. But when it comes to rights it's a hard topic to have. AI can live perceivably forever, so things like ownership should be limited. An example could be if ai could eventually buy out all land. Since they have that degree of immortality, their ownership will last just as long

>OP discovers the Ship of Theseus

>I don't get how atheists can answer this.
Simple, you don't need to believe in god to believe in souls.

>>40542448
thank you for giving me a name for this concept. yes i guess i don’t just mean someone who doesn’t believe in god, i mean some that believes that this physical realm is all that exists and we are only our physical body and nothing else.

I do.

Unless we're somehow able to scientifically answer this with 100% understanding and clarity, I wouldn't take any chances of there not being a soul, and would keep my brain intact for any sort of modifications I want to do with my body, even if my brain is the last thing that organically exists. You can say you are your brain since it's technically all you need to live, but even if your "consciousness" or thought process was replaced with code, it would be a different entity from you since you would still be able to exist at the same time as it. One thing cannot exist in multiple places at once as we know it currently. Look up the teleporter thought experiment.

>>40542003 (OP)
>I don't get how atheists can answer this.
Well you started with a nonsense term and concept.
"Me?"
What is "me?"
You need to concrete understanding and ability to define what "me" is before you can start saying what will or wont affect it.
You found it nice to hear about Ship of Theseus.
Now let me introduce you to another simple, philosophical concept: The Paradox of the Heap.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox
>A typical formulation involves a heap of sand, from which grains are removed individually. With the assumption that removing a single grain does not cause a heap not to be considered a heap anymore, the paradox is to consider what happens when the process is repeated enough times that only one grain remains and if it is still a heap. If not, then the question asks when it changed from a heap to a non-heap.

The problem is "heap" is a bad term with a vague definition - so trying to say exactly when "heap" becomes "not heap" is impossible.
In a similar way "me" is a vague and poorly defined term, so trying to figure out when something is "me" or when it no longer is "me" is impossible.

>>40545333
Smallest heap is 9 grains. Fight me IRL.

>>40547604
you're wrong. Psot your address and I'll give you a whole heap of ass whoopings with eight of them.

>>40545333
ok yeah this a helpful way of thinking about it. but i guess i just mean practically, there are situations where a person can lose their entire memory, would but most people would say even if i lost my memory, but im still alive that is still myself. but if we created a clone of someone that also didn’t have the original persons memories people would probably just say no that isn’t me just kill it.

>>40547920
>most people would say even if i lost my memory, but im still alive that is still myself
This is a wild and unsupported claim. Considering there are entire schools of thought around this, it cant be said that "most people" would see it in one specific way.

But this is irrelevant, unless you have decided that "me" is defined by some amount of memory retention.

>>40547846
Eureka 95501 we can meet near the bay

>>40542474
Thats just called being incorrect.
Materialism is incomplete as a philosophy and insisting on it is just wrong.

>>40542003 (OP)
>what makes me, me?

you

>if someone could upload my brain to a computer and I would have all the same thought processes but except I would be a code on a computer rather than a brain would it still be me?

no

>if someone took apart all the atoms in my body and then rearranged them to the exact same place they were in before is that still me?

no

> if someone wiped all of my memories is that still me?

no

>if someone made a clone of me without my memories is that still me?

no

>I don't get how atheists can answer this. without the concept of a soul

by keep things simple

>>40542474
nobody really believes that we are only our physical bodies. Not even the scientists believe that shit. They only proote this idea in order to dumb the cattle down.

>>40542003 (OP)
What makes you, you. Is the sole thought that you are you. Technically, you are never "you", as your thoughts change rapidly. One day you like something. Next day you dont. But you're still "you" because you think you are.

Source: i got so high off LSD, i forgot who i was. Ever since then, i've had huge personality issues. I find myself "playing the role of me". Whereas in reality, I dont have a clue anymore. I think thats why personality disorders even exist; a severed or damaged connection to ones ego.

Consider the following, christcuck:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

If you are truly sentient, and not just one of the many flesh robots, you are most childishly understood as the unique pattern of electrons that often enjoys inhabiting the occipital lobe, as earth society is mostly a visual civilization. While piloting the human brain, this electron pattern vibrates between the various command centers of the flesh as it performs its lifelong tasks. The pattern prefers the auditory regions if the flesh vessel is damaged or imperfected to the point of blindness. The pattern focuses on whatever dominant stimulus its local reality presents to it, and adjusts accordingly. Whether or not this is sufficient for you to be considered a truly meaningful 'you' at all is a matter your peers of your civilization collectively decide - by that I mean: there are many smartphones on this planet, many of them possessing cameras, but not all of them have technology that records in 4K+ resolution, and of those, even less ever record anything worth seeing.

Whether or not reality considers your energy interesting enough to interact with is what you should really be asking. I will again put this in other words so that as many of you can understand as possible at this IQ range: a farmers dog gives birth to many puppies, but of this litter only one is favored, only one breeds, only one gets to enjoy the maximal experience of its existence. Only that electron pattern enjoyed a very long string of visual data and according sensory experiences.

There are more souls observing this universe than there are atoms to carry them. That means there are more perspectives, more cameras, than any of you could possibly ever comprehend, pointed at every angle, in every direction, at every single thing and nonthing.

Be less concerned with what qualifies as a being, and focus more on how good of a being you can be on this stage.

It is repulsive that so many of you still push your pseudo science and fake religions even in this crucial moment of your planetbound history.