Serious For philosophercels, what do you think about this theory that we will unavoidably experience the life of a chad ?

[Inbuddhist]

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Open_individualism

It seems weird but it's actually espoused by many renown physicists and philosophers.

I posted the quote pages because quotes are easier to read than long texts nobody will read anyway.

 

[Modus Coperandi]

cope

 

[mviper]

It is true. But it is also true that we unavoidably experience the life of the virgin. Hence why we're here and our egos are experiencing such suffering. Sadder still is that it is usually only those who are suffering this fate who are free to contemplate the ramifications. Meanwhile, our counterpart in Chad lives in blissful ignorance, unaware or uncaring of our plight, and ultimately doomed to be reincarnated in likeliness of the incel archetype. In Buddhism and certain gnostic circles, the only escape is the promise of non-existence. I fear this just may be a cope.

 

[Inbuddhist]

It is true. But it is also true that we unavoidably experience the life of the virgin. Hence why we're here and our egos are experiencing such suffering. Sadder still is that it is usually only those who are suffering this fate who are free to contemplate the ramifications. Meanwhile, our counterpart in Chad lives in blissful ignorance, unaware or uncaring of our plight, and ultimately doomed to be reincarnated in likeliness of the incel archetype. In Buddhism and certain gnostic circles, the only escape is the promise of non-existence. I fear this just may be a cope.

Yes but according to this theory it's unavoidable that "you" and "chad" will trade places.

Buddhism doesn't believe in OI though, buddhism is more empty individualism.
Hindouism is the closest thing to open individualism, but the OI i'm referring to and that physicists believe in isn't based on any merit or karma.

cope

That's why it was invented by curries probably jfl.

 

[i_a_m_i]

To be clear, Open Individualism regards our experience of being conscious and aware as a phenomenon that does not take a different identity every time it exists, despite the fact that it occurs simultaneously in the world in many separate individuals. Me and you and everybody else living in this moment are actually different 7 conscious living beings, but our personal identities are not more different than your identity of today compared with your identity of yesterday. There exist differences between individuals, but they are all formal differences, not substantial. Every other living being is a different version of you, in the way that you might see yourself as many different people in a hall of mirrors, or in the way that you could meet yourself at a different stage of your life. You should see everybody else as though they are different incarnations of your very same inner self.

So we are all the same consciousness manifest in different bodies? I don't understand this quotation. It is confusing and makes no sense to me.
e: I just saw the thread was directed towards philosophercels and I'm not one

 

[Inbuddhist]

So we are all the same consciousness manifest in different bodies? I don't understand this quotation. It is confusing and makes no sense to me.
e: I just saw the thread was directed towards philosophercels and I'm not one

Yes, it's actually what it says. If you wanna know more details about it just type "open individualism" and click the search button, it's hard to convey so i prefer to let you read people who are more more gifted in writing and expression.

 

[TheSlippwrySeal]

Cope

 

[GeneticDysfunction]

cope you are born genetic shit and will die genetic shit

 

[Inbuddhist]

cope you are born genetic shit and will die genetic shit

You don't even understand the theory, it doesn't say that individuals don't die so.

 

[Frameceljeff]

cope

 

[Socratescel]

ULTRA cope, you experience what you experience, you can't access the consciousness of other people

 

[GeneticDysfunction]

This retard is talking about incels reincarnaing as a chad and vice versa

 

[IsolationHurts]

Never heard about it before, and i litteraly studied philosophy on college
It seems to be some kind of monism inspired in Hegel´s philosophy (he also thought that there was only one subject, the absolute spirit). Not very rational from our actual philosophical perspective. But its a cope, so... if you like it... all yours.

 

[Solitarian_Walker]

This retard is talking about incels reincarnaing as a chad and vice versa

bruh

 

[ShadowMonk]

Nah. When you die you gets dead and that's the end.

 

[Inbuddhist]

ULTRA cope, you experience what you experience, you can't access the consciousness of other people

Again, someone else who doesn't even understand the theory and want to refute it, it gets tiring. That's why i added "for philosophercels".

The theory doesn't say that you can "access other consciousness", it's not a surnatural theory.

Nah. When you die you gets dead and that's the end.

You don't have any proof of that.

bruh

It's not exactly reincarnation.

It's more like that "You are already everyone, but at each instance you can only access to one individual consciousness"

Never heard about it before, and i litteraly studied philosophy on college
It seems to be some kind of monism inspired in Hegel´s philosophy (he also thought that there was only one subject, the absolute spirit). Not very rational from our actual philosophical perspective. But its a cope, so... if you like it... all yours.

It's actually more rational than the competing theory (closed individualism) which makes absolutely no sense and is incompatible with logic and physics. Closed Individualism makes absolutely no sense because it implies that there is some essence in us, that travel time even when our atoms and cells and memories and temperament change.

Only competitors that are rational and compatible with physics are : Empty Individualism and Open Individualism (this one)

 

[Deleted member 1042]

This retard is talking about incels reincarnaing as a chad and vice versa

No, I don't think that's what this is about.

 

[StaroRavager]

ULTRA cope, you experience what you experience, you can't access the consciousness of other people

 

[LDARBuddah]

Sure I see the theory as something that could lighten your mind
But at the end of the day its still cope

 

[history]

Open individualism is completely stupid . Closed individualism is the reality .

It is not only about being dead then reborn as a chad .

It also means "I" sleep with a sense that I am "my name" and wake up with a sense that "I" am a chicken who is kept in a cage.

Lol at believing in this thing.

 

[Angus13]

.Hindouism is the closest thing to open individualism, but the OI i'm referring to and that physicists believe in isn't based on any merit or karma.

The whole concept of "karma" is pure cope tbh, yeah there is such thing as cause and effect, and peoples' actions have consequences, but this doesn't automatically lead to a storybook scenario where the good people are rewarded and the bad people are punished.

Lots of evil people are in high positions of power (legally or illegally) and can get away with pure evil, while terrible misfortunes fall upon some of the best people out there. Karma is kinda like some new age woowoo concept that doesn't really make sense, it's drenched in just world fallacy.

 

[Inbuddhist]

The whole concept of "karma" is pure cope tbh, yeah there is such thing as cause and effect, and peoples' actions have consequences, but this doesn't automatically lead to a storybook scenario where the good people are rewarded and the bad people are punished.

Lots of evil people are in high positions of power (legally or illegally) and can get away with pure evil, while terrible misfortunes fall upon some of the best people out there. Karma is kinda like some new age woowoo concept that doesn't really make sense, it's drenched in just world fallacy.

To be fair to hindouism and buddhism, and altough i repeat that i don't believe in karma, they never say that karma reaches all its fruition in a single life, so the fact that tyran get to live their full life unharmed and happy doesn't disprove anything for a buddhist or a hinddhou, because according to their doctrine karma will have its effect in another life.

Don't tell me it's cope, i don't believe in karma, i'm just trying to be fair to those doctrines and not misrepresent them

 

[Angus13]

To be fair to hindouism and buddhism, and altough i repeat that i don't believe in karma, they never say that karma reaches all its fruition in a single life, so the fact that tyran get to live their full life unharmed and happy doesn't disprove anything for a buddhist or a hinddhou, because according to their doctrine karma will have its effect in another life.

Don't tell me it's cope, i don't believe in karma, i'm just trying to be fair to those doctrines and not misrepresent them

fair enough.

 

[history]

Open individualism is completely stupid . Closed individualism is the reality .

It is not only about being dead then reborn as a chad .

It also means "I" sleep with a sense that I am "my name" and wake up with a sense that "I" am a chicken who is kept in a cage.

Lol at believing in this thing.

@Inbuddhist Anything you have to say about my this argument.

 

[Inbuddhist]

@Inbuddhist Anything you have to say about my this argument.

Closed individualism isn't even compatible with science, it implies the existence of some immutable essence, like soul, i don't believe in the surnatural.

The debate is only between Empty I and Open I, i don't even consider closed individualism as a possibility.

And just because something seems weird to you isn't an argument against it. For instance the fact that parallel universes sound weird to us isn't an argument against them, our intuition was given mainly for optimal life in the Savanah, not for comprehending the universe

 

[history]

Closed individualism isn't even compatible with science, it implies the existence of some immutable essence, like soul, i don't believe in the surnatural.

The debate is only between Empty I and Open I, i don't even consider closed individualism as a possibility.

And just because something seems weird to you isn't an argument against it. For instance the fact that parallel universes sound weird to us isn't an argument against them, our intuition was given mainly for optimal life in the Savanah, not for comprehending the universe

Cl does not necessarily mean soul , most seculars/atheists are closed individualists.

And what you have to say about my argument against OI

 

[ChronicPaincel]

So we are all the same consciousness manifest in different bodies? I don't understand this quotation. It is confusing and makes no sense to me.
e: I just saw the thread was directed towards philosophercels and I'm not one

Try to quit thinking for a minute and see for yourself, that consciousness unbound of ego is the same consciousness we all have, we even share the same consciousness as animals, our humans brains and big egos make us forget about the silence we all share. we're everything theory

Nah. When you die you gets dead and that's the end.

Do you have proof?

 

[Inbuddhist]

Cl does not necessarily mean soul , most seculars/atheists are closed individualists.

And what you have to say about my argument against OI

Most seculars don't even think rationnaly of personal identity, but among those who do, in a systematic and empirical way, absolutely no one believe in C.I because it's incompatible with science.

Closed individualism necessarily implies some unchanging essence, so if its nit a soul what is it ?

 

[history]

Most seculars don't even think rationnaly of personal identity, but among those who do, in a systematic and empirical way, absolutely no one believe in C.I because it's incompatible with science.

CI is just normal behaviour it just believes that "you" and " I" are different.

And consciousness ( feeling of "I") was given by evolution.

And EI has no practical significance as my present "I" will always be concerned about my future "i".


And I think Stephen hawking was right when he said "Philosophy is dead ".