>Life is a deterministic simulation. >All 7.4 billion go

>tfw when you simulate an entire universe only to find that someone else was reincarnating the souls of the dead at later points in the simulation

Why do I even fucking bother?

>>19375292
>Implying reincarnation isn't fearmongering to keep the large numbers of Asians in check.

One day even we will simulate a universe, and when that day comes it is likely that this universe will not be the original simulation. So we are likely living in a simulation. And if reincarnation was valid, then in that case your mind, your point of view, (you), would end. That is unlikely. After all we have only ever experienced awareness. On the other hand eternal oblivion is an unlikely scenario, seeing that in that case in whole eternity you would only be aware this brief moment. It is mathematically extremely likely that the awareness survives death (and our chance of being aware right now is higher.) The afterlife is likely a technologically advanced, immortal, physical universe. This life is probably a "rite of passage."

>>19375797
>So we are likely living in a simulation.
No, that's not how it works. You have to reason out WHY there would be infinitely many recursions of that simulation within itself. Just saying that we're probably in a simulation isn't the point of anthropocentric resimulation.

>>19375797
>The afterlife is likely a technologically advanced, immortal, physical universe.
I think this is so because if the next life wasn't immortal, then you would die again, and thus lose your memories and thus your self. The next world would be technologically advanced because they are able to run this simulation. And it would be physical because there's no reason not to assume so.

File: Alan Watts.jpg (67KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 850x400px

reincarnation is real.

Fucking bullshit, We come back from the grave op whether you like it or not. This ride ain't over yet!

>>19375847
>>19375855
I don't think so. Some people are always lucky. I bet Steven Spielberg won't lose his self and memories, but instead he will wake up in a new young-looking body in the afterlife free of worries. They will tell him that what he just experienced was his one earth life and that now he is free to continue his journey without the weight, as if he had earned to be a free citizen of that strange world.

>>19375832
Yeah I think that we are likely living in one. Why would I need to reason out anything more than that thesis?

>>19375970
If you think we're living in one that's fine, but when you use the word "so" as if the odds that we are living in a simulation can be derived from what you've said up to that point, I'm going to call it out.

The next celebrity death will be Woody Allen.

>>19375991
Aight. But this is still probably not the base reality. I mean if it's possible to run a simulated life then this most certainly is one. What happened before the big bang? Why is the universe intelligent? What caused the terribly convenient meteorite? What made the DNA? Why was Pam Reynolds out of body while braindead. What causes the paranormal? Why is there ~50% men and ~50% women. Etc. It all points at intelligent universe.

>>19376027
Not necessarily. The anthropic principle states that we live in a universe with those conditions because without those conditions we would not be alive to witness it. In short, if there were a near infinite number of universes, we could only arise in one with these exact conditions and so it shows coincidence (albeit necessary) rather than providence. For evidence of providence you'd have to look at the odds of having a sun to moon to distance ratio perfectly aligned for a total eclipse to take place on the one planet we know of with intelligent life to see it. The fact that we exist in a universe with conditions for us to exist in, could on its own just be down to the fact we live in a multiverse and as we need those conditions we exist here simply because we can.

>>19376238
>The anthropic principle states that we live in a universe with those conditions because without those conditions we would not be alive to witness it.
It's not only about the conditions. Something must cause the awareness.

>>19375275
Not every being goes to the same afterlife. Most people do go to the astral planes of earth after death. If you can change your vibration, you can change your destiny and go where you please. The other worlds are locked based on your level of conscious awareness and advancement. It wouldn't do any good for human souls to travel to worlds they could not energetically survive within. If you have love of the infinite creator, and connection within your soul, creation can be an open book for you.

>>19375855
Why?

>>19376300
Why would I want to love the person who made this shit existence?

>>19375275
>>All 7.4 billion
Don't believe everything you hear. The elites want to cull the population, but not because there are too many of us, but because they are greedy and cruel and don't give a shit about you and your quality of life.

>>19375275
All of these are incoherent beliefs that are unrelated to one another

>>19378232
Only because the points aren't explained further. They could form a coherent paradigm if the philosophy was thorough. I wouldn't be surprised if it went like that.

>>19375275
I always think myself as a character in a very big game. Like someone's just controlling me. Sometimes when I just daydream or wander about, I assume thats the time my "controller" doze off or like drink coffee, some shit. I don't know. Maybe I'm having a loose screw in the head.

>>19376274
why must something cause awareness? and what would have made the thing that caused awareness and so on?

>>19378209
Really?

What if the elites want to cull the population because they've been commanded to rid the world of the masses who have lost the natural, spiritual way? Those that cannot be around for a unified, pure, global purpose because they are busy squabbling like toddlers?

>>19378811
If extinction is their solution to mass ignorance, then they aren't truly elite. They are fools as much as anyone else, failing to bring knowledge to the people that need it.

>>19378812
I agree wholeheartedly.

Yet many people are so trapped in their flawed, microscopic, material sense of self that if truths were revealed to them, they would not take it well at all. Violence, emotion, and worldly poisons still have such a grip that they would arise in retaliation somehow against truth, love, and light.

>>19378812
its not just about knowledge, but the capacity for it. technology (not electronics, but everything from stone tools) have allowed the human race to thrive to the point of becoming a genetic cesspool, most of which will never be capable of moving beyond a primitive tribal mindset. our species is at a point where we understand many of the problems that face us and our surroundings, and the best of us would be foolish not to erase the inferior and save earth while theres still time.

How fucking difficult is it to reinsert a carnation? Of course it is real.

>>19375275
>>Life is a deterministic simulation.
>>All 7.4 billion go to the same afterlife.
so why is it only humans that co top your afterlife. why not animals, trees, micro bacteria and the likes.
>>19375275
>>Religion, spirituality, and supernatural are fake
right and what proof f this do you have? remember lack of evidence is not proof of nonexistence.
sure a lot of religion has been filled with propaganda over the ages but that does not mean they are fake, only their message distorted. You must not know what the word spirituality mean as it does exist without a doubt have you not heard of mediation, that's spiritual, are you trying to tell me meditation is fake. as for paranormal, by all meaning of the word it can't exist, otherwise it would be normal, its just an umbrella term used to cover anything slightly out of the ordinary be it fact or fiction.

>>19378845
>the best of us would be foolish not to erase the inferior
If you can't identify them, then you're just advocating for mindless slaughter. If you refuse to share your method for determination, if you won't let anyone verify that any specific individual has been verified as inferior or simply labeled as such to get rid of them, then it's just another tool for directed and controlled assassination with the concept of eugenics playing the role of co-opted ideal.

But that's also not how fucking genetics works. If you breed with a population that "can't," you'll find that they suddenly start to can. Their genetic diversity is far more valuable than any ideal set of traits you think you can select out.

>>19378858
Those that have strayed from a loving, natural path are part of the problem. They are contributing to entropy... a law not of the universe but of this planet.

There will come a time when all those who contribute to chaos and evil (that is, seeing yet ignoring knowledge) will find their own particular brand of evil turned upon them.

What if the elites are not planning some apocalypse? What if the Divine mandates a retribution to each and every soul who no longer belongs?

>>19378870
The concept of morality is no longer an inhibition in thinking about this if one considers reincarnation for a moment.

The souls that leave this place might die and be killed by an external force... yet they will wake up from this reality and be ushered to the next.

If one refuses to consider that, let us return to the concept of morality and humanity. Killing a pathetic, mangled bird is more humane than leaving it to suffer.

>>19378870
>What if the Divine mandates a retribution to each and every soul who no longer belongs?
Then the Divine have strayed from a loving, natural path, and mean to contribute to chaos and evil, and ought meet no other fate than having their own particular brand of evil returned back up toward heaven.

>>19378874
See the flawed thoughts that arise when one applies humanity's concept of morality upon the larger, encompassing Universe?

Almost as if humanity's concept is the flawed one. How could the Divine source, whatever it is, be flawed?

>>19378901
I don't care if or who considers it flawed. If, by its own logic, it tries to be a hypocrite, I have no qualms echoing its malice right back at it.

There's nothing flawed about letting the divine decay if it's decayed enough to bring its decay to others. You asked what it would mean if the Divine held enough malice to enact retribution. I replied. Maybe the Divine isn't flawed and would never do shit like that. If you think the flaw originates in my post and not in the idea that the Divine would mandate retribution for an act that they themselves are performing, then you haven't explained why they get to be hypocrites but I'm not allowed to return their hypocrisy to them.

>>19378853
>so why is it only humans that co top your afterlife. why not animals, trees, micro bacteria and the likes.
I never said anything about non-humans.
>>Religion, spirituality, and supernatural are fake
right and what proof f this do you have? remember lack of evidence is not proof of nonexistence.
sure a lot of religion [...] fact or fiction.
Well, I did say that those concepts exist to keep us busy. I.e. our experience of them is real, just that they are not factual. You didn't conveniently quote the whole sentence but if you read all of it, then you should see what I meant. Maybe I was unclear. I do believe that paranormal phenomena happen. I just don't think that ufos come from the outer space or that Marian apparitions are apparitions of biblical Mary. Similarly I think that reincarnation is bs. Believe what you will, I just don't see how entirely losing our memories would make any sense.

>>19375847
Sweet shit that's creepy. The prior owner of this body was obsessed with imagining that, and that was how he went to sleep at night. One night, the next morning saw me wake up in his place, profoundly confused. I can't remember anything from the life of the first owner of this body until something reminds me of it...
and so when you posted that, I suddenly remembered a whole lot of imagining going to sleep and never waking up that had never been accessible to me before.

>>19378721
Then people should take the time to explain their philosophies. A greentext is not enough. Not judging anyone, but if you anon's want people to take you seriously, you have to consciously and rationally develop your beliefs enough to get people to pay attention to them.
Otherwise, tl;dr and no one learns anything

>>19379410
Just gonna go out on a limb here. Do you have experience with the whole tulpa concept?

>>19379909
While the subject of tulpas is up, I can't leave it without saying "don't," but I dislike the entire topic. You're probably thinking of the same anon as myself, but I don't want to talk about it. I know I'm crazy. I just thought people might appreciate it like a story. A strange distant experience to imagine - suddenly having a bloom of disturbing memories well up in response to reading one of these inspirational quote memes.

Even if this was a simulated reality, how do you describe the reality that simulated us? Does that mean death actually exists in a 'real reality'? How did that reality's universe come into existence?

It can never be comprehended because existence itself is paradoxical.

If there was nothing, then how did 'something' come into reality.

If that something has always existed, well, how the hell do you even explain something 'always' existing.

>>19378750
Must be one boring person if they want to see my fap all the time and shitpost on 4chan.

>>19376300
>It wouldn't do any good for human souls to travel to worlds they could not energetically survive within
Alot of people cannot 'energetically' survive in this world either yet they're here. hmm

>>19376027
Random chance. It is a self-correcting system linking to physics.

>>19380022
>random chance
>evolution
choose one