Now I am a strong believer in ones right to die, especially if their terminally ill. So why did I post this? I want to get a gauge on what others think here. And hopefully provoke some thought.
I know many of you are a fan of Thomas Campbell so let's see what he has to say. I forwarded the link to the exact place I want to talk about, which is 4 minutes into the video.
Tom Campbell: To Be or Not To Be; The Question of Suicide
http://youtu.be/7GiLDuaDl4I?t=4m
Now interestingly in this video Thomas Campbell says straight out that it's ethical for one to commit suicide if they are terminally ill and they seek out Jack Kevorkian. Which would be illegal in many places. Along with Jack Kevorkian having gone to jail for helping people die who were suffering. I am not condoning anyone doing something illegal here. But what I am pointing out is that Tom Campbell is extremely liberal when it comes to one's right to die it seems.
So then Tom Campbell goes on to talk about a suicide by a young man that lead his mom to communicate to him and then help many others that are dealing with emotional suicidal thoughts.
He also talks in the video how emotional suicides are ultimately bad decisions. Which I mostly agree.
Now I am not advocating one taking their life if they are young, or have a mental illness. But I am advocating very careful consideration of the end of ones life about this issue. And if that means doctor assisted suicide (which is legal in some states), or more than that. Then I am here to try to break the taboo that is around this sensitive topic, and help people understand it better, while simultaneously asking you what your personal thoughts are on it. All thoughts are welcome.
So is suicide ever ethical for one to commit, it can be legal doctor assisted suicide or not? And if yes then under what conditions would it be ethical? I don't want people's minds to be burdened with what is legal or not, I want to see if I can provoke some truly unbiased thoughts on this issue here.
My position is that it is a question of the benefit and harm done to all parties in question, as most ethical questions are best understood to me.
There are clearly instances of self sacrifice where the ethics clearly seems in favor of that choice, but they are mostly artificial situations, such as the kind arranged in films. I am thinking of instances such as Mr. Spock sacrificing himself to save his crew mates in the 1982 version of "Wrath of Khan". They don't turn up often at all in real life, but they aren't outside of the realm of possibility.
Usually a case of suicide is needless, and the result of emotional stress, as you mention. In those cases the ethics are probably far against such an act.
Situations such as doctor-assisted suicides of the terminally ill are probably pretty close to ethically neutral acts to my understanding. Very little is probably left to be gained by the individual remaining alive a few more days. I feel the objections are probably rooted in religious teachings, which I guess is what it is.
Physician assisted suicide is becoming legal. There are a couple countries in Europe that have legalized it. I deal quite a bit with the underlying issues of terminally ill patients. It's agonizing both for the families the patient as well as the staff. The pain meds used at the end of life are powerful narcotics. Overdosing the patient can lead to respiratory arrest. So we constantly face the question. Do you give the dose and pray the patient doesn't stop breathing right afterwards.
Personally I don't mind keeping a patient comfortable and even comatose until the pass. I could not intentionally and knowingly overdose them.
The doctor assisted suicide issue is complex. I don't think there's so much a question of ethics in the case of a terminal patient. I think the attitude should be to keep the patient comfortable at all costs. For someone with Alzhiemers or other debilitating dementia or something like that. Even though the memory might be gone and they have to be cared for those patients can still have a great deal of quality to their lives if they're in a consistent environment they usually feel very safe and still enjoy recreational activities and interaction with people even though they cannot remember the converstations. They still know love. The long term memory stays intact for most of the disease so they tell stories. Medications can help control the issues that arise so I question whether assisted suicide is appropriate in those cases. I don't think its a good thing to do for convenience sake. What that may lead to is culling and eugenics which I think is unethical.
In the NP I have no problem doing the Spock thing. Its occurred many times.
In the physical Blue has my support on the ethics.
Depression can create suicidal tendencies and this shouldn't be considered period.
Only those of sound mind and terminally I'll get my support.
Thanks everyone for your comments.
Personally am very close to Stillwater on this issue. I am very practical when it comes to this issue. If one's metal illness outweighs even that of their families love they should be given the choice to end their life. Belgium is such a Country that allows chronically depressed people can get a prescription from a doctor to end their life. And even kids can get a medication under certain circumstances. I think it's a good test that pushes our limits on what we think is ethically acceptable. They are like a test for the rest of the world.
In the end I have to even question myself and Stillwaters view that it's a matter of the pros out weighing the cons. Certainly society makes all kinds of decisions that are against other people's wishes and even their love for them which aren't unethical. Eg a son telling their father that they are gay and then the father disowns them. This can be just as bad as if the son committed suicide for the father. Why? Because we mostly think of our selves with our own choices, as independent and separated from others. But as soon as it comes to the choice of doctor assisted suicide we think this is our choice, and not their choice. I know it's a very tough subject even for me. I mean I wouldn't want my sibling to take their life as a young person out in the world if they had a metal illness. And yet how do we gauge their own personal mental suffering which is not ours? I feel like I am getting into philosophy now.
Hell if we could control being gay with a law how we control doctor assisted suicide with laws, then their would still be tons of laws against being gay I bet. And certainly being gay is just as much of a right as doctor assisted suicide, if not more. People can suffer much more in silence at the end of their life with their dignity being striped away than what a gay person would ever suffer throughout their lifetime.
Lastly let me point out that there was a guy that had a very very painful disease that he was a staunch supporter of no doctor assisted suicide. He was the one that went to congress to testify that their was no need for doctor assisted suicide. He did this for years. And at the end of his disease guess what, he changed his mind on this issue and thought that people should have this right. I wish I could remember his name. My guess is that his physical pain turned into a more mental suffering for him at the end and he just couldn't stand against doctor assisted suicide any longer. Most people that are against doctor assisted suicide once pushed will be for it. We must be considerate with true empathy for those that suffer, for the physical and mental suffering alike.
Lastly don't worry I am not depressed and I have no thoughts of ending my life anytime soon. Thanks to all you for chiming in again.
I'm of the opinion that as long as the proper mindset is there, then anyone should be able to end their physical lives whenever they want to. There's no "penalty" for checking out early... like some people would have to believe. There's only the lack of chance of spiritual growth... you can always continue it elsewhere.
The problem comes when you want to die for a selfish reason. Not wanting to place unbearable pain upon yourself and those who love you dearly isn't a selfish reason. A selfish reason would be you simply don't like the life you're living... well, the reason behind that belief is entirely your perspective and it means you have a lot of growing left to do, so in order to do that, you'll most likely be back here (or another supportive physical reality) in order to learn that lesson anyway. So, selfish reasons for wanting to die don't, in themselves, cause any kind of penalty such as "you're going to hell"... that's just ridiculous and is a fear-based religious response, but you will have to learn the lesson (ie: change your perspective, change your reality) eventually, so you might as well just do it here.
I could probably write pages on this, but suffice to say that's the basic premise behind my position. It's a (like most things I refer to) consciousness-based perception, not an individual, materialistic, physical-based one.
As for is it "ethical" or "moral" to do it... those are meaningless labels just like "good" and "evil". There's only Love-based and Fear-based reasons for doing things... and they go back solely to within you.
Quote from: Xanth on February 26, 2015, 17:48:30
I'm of the opinion that as long as the proper mindset is there, then anyone should be able to end their physical lives whenever they want to. There's no "penalty" for checking out early... like some people would have to believe. There's only the lack of chance of spiritual growth... you can always continue it elsewhere.
The problem comes when you want to die for a selfish reason. Not wanting to place unbearable pain upon yourself and those who love you dearly isn't a selfish reason. A selfish reason would be you simply don't like the life you're living... well, the reason behind that belief is entirely your perspective and it means you have a lot of growing left to do, so in order to do that, you'll most likely be back here (or another supportive physical reality) in order to learn that lesson anyway. So, selfish reasons for wanting to die don't, in themselves, cause any kind of penalty such as "you're going to hell"... that's just ridiculous and is a fear-based religious response, but you will have to learn the lesson (ie: change your perspective, change your reality) eventually, so you might as well just do it here.
I could probably write pages on this, but suffice to say that's the basic premise behind my position. It's a (like most things I refer to) consciousness-based perception, not an individual, materialistic, physical-based one.
As for is it "ethical" or "moral" to do it... those are meaningless labels just like "good" and "evil". There's only Love-based and Fear-based reasons for doing things... and they go back solely to within you.
Wow Xanth I wouldn't have expected you to take such a liberal stance on this. Good for you. I think that is some really out side of the box thinking there. I would say that between you and Stillwater I am more on your side. Though I have some reservations.
Other than that I would have rather have used the word ethical than moral. The word moral has too much baggage tied to it in religious ways. And I would argue that the word ethical is more of a love based word than one of fear at the root of it. Though they aren't interchange, in law and for all intents and purposes the word ethical would be more accepted than the term "love based decision".
Thanks for chiming in Xanth.
Quotes for is it "ethical" or "moral" to do it... those are meaningless labels just like "good" and "evil".
I disagree with this part. "Moral" is the more arbitrary of the two words, and deals with beliefs and societal conventions about what is right and wrong, and I am perfectly comfortable saying morals don't exist (maybe this is what you meant too).
"Ethics", on the other hands, is the concept that in some situations, there may be a right thing and a wrong thing to do, based on the benefit and harm to the parties involved. When people are judged on an ethical scale, such as in a courtroom situation, it is chiefly their intent, based on the knowledge they had available to them, that is meant to be the guide.
For this reason, I actually do think "ethics" is the word that most closely resembles the intent concept you use. I agree that words are a barrier to understanding at times, but they are also very useful, as some words have extremely well-agreed upon definitions, and can incite perfect understanding when used.
See, I've always kind of used those two words interchangeably. :)
You're right though. It would be based on the Intent behind the action. Is it a Love-based Intent, or a Fear-based Intent.
That then goes beyond "good" and "bad"... "right" and "wrong". It's not opinion or belief based at that point.
Too bad we can't use the argument of "is it an act of spiritual growth" in a court of law. LoL
Edit: It's this difference between a Love-based Intent and a Fear-based Intent is what drives spiritual growth (on an individual and by extension, a societal level).
To purify your Intent is to move, NATURALLY, towards making more decisions and actions based on Love-based Intent rather than Fear-based.
When you make the decision to end your life, if it's a Love-based decision, then it's a good thing in my opinion and I fully support anyone who chooses this.
If it's a Fear-based decision to end your life, then you're looking at a spiritual regression of sorts and you clearly have a lot of growing to do still... so you'll be back.
The question is whether you're forced to come back or not. LoL
In a nutshell morals are more at home for the individual where ethics apply more to a community.
English is fickle at times and these two nouns can be interchanged in some contexts. The topic at hand is more applicable to an ethical agreement than one of moral.
Worded above in this way, the difference can be seen.
If you want to obtain a deeper insight then a grammatical or syntactic based site would be a better place to read upon these two important nouns.
A situation existed many years ago about the use of steroids for bodybuilding. They were put to a vote and the result was they're good for the moral, their use was unethical.
A decision on the suicide can only be made after everyone involved has had their say. This is the ethical side of the decision. The morality of the termination can be deduced from the outcome of the ethics based on the individuals wishes.
Simple, it certainly isn't.
QuoteA situation existed many years ago about the use of steroids for bodybuilding. They were put to a vote and the result was they're good for the moral, their use was unethical.
Hmm... instead of "moral" here, did you really mean "morale" (confidence ; enthusiasm ; spirit ) ?
And oddly, I think the reverse reading is more common- "morals" are community-oriented, and determined by subcultures and peer group-conventions, whereas "ethics" refer to something which can be weighed in the light of logic or reason, and aren't determined by convention or traditions, as morals are.
Normally I wouldn't make an issue of it, but we are trying to pin down the conventional meanings of the two words in this case, and I think we are getting even more confused, haha :roll:
I am a first class thread-derailer, apologies, Plasma!
Quote from: Stillwater on February 26, 2015, 23:21:33I am a first class thread-derailer, apologies, Plasma!
Hey I remember getting beat up on this forum for doing that before by personalreality. I'm a cool guy though. I'll let it pass. :wink:
Edit No wait I take that back I'll do it for you since I am ethical. LOL
To me, I gotta agree with Stillwater for the heroism act of sacrificing oneself to save many others or a single person (like someone who's gonna get hit by a car etc.)
I can't really enter in to much details about if a physician or a doctor should have the right to induce a lethal dose to a terminally ill patient, because every situation is different. Unless that this person only suffer pain and misery, or doesn't have a mind of it's own and can't think or is going crazy (and that they have written in their testimonials that they would like the suffering to be over with) I think a patient should be kept under medicine until he pass away. Never purposely.
My point of view on suicide is that it's a disgusting thing (although it's a part of life, I wish this act would never have been performed by any humans), and the reason why it is, is that I've definitely lived that in my past lives... And now I'm talking hundreds of times, I've seen that rope and I know where it leads, I know that it leads straight back to the beginning of this same life.
Now I'm not talking about the act itself, the act itself is something of which you see no more options. It's not an act of laziness or for quitters. It's just that the person doesn't see any other possible solution. There's always a solution other than suicide except for honour reasons (i.e. death by seppuku in Japanese traditions) but this is no longer part of our traditions. To me it all has to do with the exhaustion of the mind and body. If someone is no longer able to fight to live and see another day and has no purpose in life, this can be the only solution to his eyes, even though there is a multitude of solution available to that person, if he is exhausted he will choose the easiest option.
This is probably all part of the test of life, which we all must've failed in one or more of our past lives.
Same as in the Matrix, when Morpheus tells Neo to make the jump, but NOBODY makes it to the other side the first time.
It's just like that in life, you build up your body, your mind, your spirit, until you can make it through the other side.
Same goes for video games, you never see someone finish a hard video game on first try and go for the highest achievements right?
It's just not possible, you will die: dozens, hundreds, thousands of time until you get that Last Achievement.
Still, I think you have to use all possible resources and gather all your strength in order to vanquish that terrible idea of ending your life. Even for walking out.
There's no reason why a person should "walk out" and end their life, because that means that you still have to learn some things. Humans Lifespans are ±80 years and I don't think anyone can learn everything they have to in 20-30 years or even 50-60 years. If you think you have achieved your purpose, then sit down, start meditating and introspect yourself until you can master your thoughts, and can endure total calm and serenity in your mind. Then keep going. Write a book about how you triumphed over the obstacles that life laid down for you. And tell us what it's all about.
Quote from: Kzaal on March 02, 2015, 00:54:43My point of view on suicide is that it's a disgusting thing (although it's a part of life, I wish this act would never have been performed by any humans), and the reason why it is, is that I've definitely lived that in my past lives... And now I'm talking hundreds of times, I've seen that rope and I know where it leads, I know that it leads straight back to the beginning of this same life.
I think suicide can be disgusting depending how how it's done. As far as having to redo this live over again because of a suicide, I don't think it's as disgusting as it is a waste of time energy and resources in many cases.
Quote from: Kzaal on March 02, 2015, 00:54:43If you think you have achieved your purpose, then sit down, start meditating and introspect yourself until you can master your thoughts, and can endure total calm and serenity in your mind. Then keep going. Write a book about how you triumphed over the obstacles that life laid down for you. And tell us what it's all about.
I know that I haven't achieved all that I can within my life. And I plan on living to be an old man. But I refuse to put my dignity in the hands of Doctors in this day and age at the end of my life where they don't give a F*** about my dignity. Pain management only goes so far. So I will end it before it gets to that point, but I will live my life's full potential no doubt. Don't worry there are plenty of pain free options for myself that don't comprise on dignity for exiting life.
Thanks for chiming in Kzaal.
Quote from: Kzaal on March 02, 2015, 00:54:43
If you think you have achieved your purpose, then sit down, start meditating and introspect yourself until you can master your thoughts, and can endure total calm and serenity in your mind. Then keep going. Write a book about how you triumphed over the obstacles that life laid down for you. And tell us what it's all about.
That's kind of the thing... your purpose for being here has no end to it. There's no "destination" or "goal".
As Adyashanti says... the point when you can hoist your flag of enlightenment and claim to the world that you have awakened isn't the goal or even the point. It's only one small step to the top of a mountain, to which when you get to the top of and are able to look out over the horizon, see an infinite number of mountains, all higher than the last. It's like in martial arts when you gain your "black belt"... most people believe that is the pinnacle of your martial arts training, not knowing that the only thing it means is that you've learned the *BASICS* for that martial art and are ready to truly BEGIN your training. You're a baby who just learned to crawl... now you get to learn to stand up, walk, run... eventually fly and then whatever else comes after that. ;)
To learn to Love has no end... anyone who thinks that they've learned all they can learn or have done everything they can do... well, they have ego issues to work through first. :)
Well put Xanth.
The way I see it, life is an experience, we come here to experience something be it being poor, being rich, disabled, athlete, mother, father, miscarried baby, all experiences but I don't think we're here to learn anything because we as infinite beings already have access to everything so when anyone says why end your life when you have so much to learn; well that doesn't resonate with me at all so if anyone wants to end their life would there be any judgment at all beyond physical life, hhmm I don't think so, but obviously most suicides are done by people with extreme mental, emotional issues that will no doubt carry into their non physical existence so their environment may resemble the despair they had at the time of the suicide until they heal and realize they're home and everything is ok.
My two cents
Thanks for chiming in mcdwg.
Quote from: mcdwg on March 03, 2015, 07:54:47
The way I see it, life is an experience, we come here to experience something be it being poor, being rich, disabled, athlete, mother, father, miscarried baby, all experiences but I don't think we're here to learn anything because we as infinite beings already have access to everything so when anyone says why end your life when you have so much to learn; well that doesn't resonate with me at all so if anyone wants to end their life would there be any judgment at all beyond physical life, hhmm I don't think so, but obviously most suicides are done by people with extreme mental, emotional issues that will no doubt carry into their non physical existence so their environment may resemble the despair they had at the time of the suicide until they heal and realize they're home and everything is ok.
My two cents
Oh I forgot to mention that is also a good reason why one would want to have doctor assisted suicide at the end of their life so that they can forgo the suffering that might carry over into the astral when they die. No doubt there are a lot of people that needlessly suffer at the end of their life. Being force-feed having invasive treatments with low quality of life and little time left. It's best to just end it many times.
Quote from: PlasmaAstralProjection on March 03, 2015, 15:28:54
Oh I forgot to mention that is also a good reason why one would want to have doctor assisted suicide at the end of their life so that they can forgo the suffering that might carry over into the astral when they die. No doubt there are a lot of people that needlessly suffer at the end of their life. Being force-feed having invasive treatments with low quality of life and little time left. It's best to just end it many times.
Suffering due to physical pain and discomfort isn't the kind of suffering that does anything to your long term spiritual growth. It's the Intent behind WHY someone ends their life through physician assisted methods. They do so because they don't want to go through the inevitable pain and discomfort that comes with the problem, especially if they're 100% going to die soon anyway... along with not wanting to put their family through seeing the them deteriorate. That act in itself is noble and would be reason for spiritual growth. It's putting the needs of others above even your own life.
Quote from: Xanth on March 03, 2015, 16:05:49
Suffering due to physical pain and discomfort isn't the kind of suffering that does anything to your long term spiritual growth. It's the Intent behind WHY someone ends their life through physician assisted methods. They do so because they don't want to go through the inevitable pain and discomfort that comes with the problem, especially if they're 100% going to die soon anyway... along with not wanting to put their family through seeing the them deteriorate. That act in itself is noble and would be reason for spiritual growth. It's putting the needs of others above even your own life.
That's one way to look at it.
Quote from: PlasmaAstralProjection on March 03, 2015, 16:08:19
That's one way to look at it.
What's another way?
I'm honestly asking... these days I sometimes find it difficult to STOP thinking "consciousness"-first.
I think that with the technology we have presently and the ones that are going to appear in the 10-15 years, there won't be that necessity of ending the suffering.
I've read a lot of stuff online about the singularity and all the technology we will have by 2025-2035. There will be medicine that will rejuvenate your body, and I think that by then assisted suicide and stuff like that just won't be needed anymore. No one knows exactly what is going to happen in singularity and they are just speculations, but I strongly believe that medicine will be innovated to a point where we can easily repair our bodies and our inner organs in case of a failure.
So people will probably just die of age and no longer of sickness or illness, they will either die of age or not die at all.
Now is it moral? is it good or is it bad? Should we actually die or stay alive eternally? THAT is the question.
Suicide will no longer have it's place by 2035...
Implants will take place, people with mental illness will be followed closely in their thoughts to make sure they don't give up to the bad ones and I think either everyone will start feeling happier or we're gonna face our own destruction.
Personally, now, I still have no point of view on these things. I'm not sure if it's any good or any bad, because we have no idea of telling what's really going to happen. These are based on predictions made by scientists in the domain... I don't feel like mind control would be a great idea, far from it. But this is due to happen one way or the other... Otherwise we'll end by destroying all computers which I don't think will ever happen.
Sure there's probably lots of people who will kill themselves because they can't bear the information or the technology advancing so quickly. But it's like that, humans are not the same as animals trying to evolve, they CONSTANTLY need that evolution state where they have new products or new technology to ease their lives.
Even myself, even if I would love to just throw everything out the window and go live far away in a temple or something like this being alone with my thoughts, it's never going to happen, I'm just too used to this technology. Everyday I connect. So is billions of people...
So now, suicide vanishing... Easier way of life, if possibly, not mind controlled, happiness forever and the medicine to live your life longer and healthy... I could see a good point in there, being more intelligent(with implants) is one of those...
Quote from: Xanth on March 03, 2015, 18:05:24
What's another way?
I'm honestly asking... these days I sometimes find it difficult to STOP thinking "consciousness"-first.
Well I think that if one is having a hellish experience at the end of their life, having been suffering to their last dying breath there is most defiantly a chance that they could end up projecting those fears into the astral. I have read NDE's where people were in dark places and they were scared to death. Some seeing daemons or having their life-force sucked out of them. Now whether those things actually happened is up to debate for all intents and purposes to them they actually experienced hell. Some report being in a place of pure suffering. Again whether they would end up staying in such a place for a long time is up to debate. But not everyone projects into heavenly realms or even the RTZ.
I read a book by an atheist named Howard Storm that died and when he died he talked about being in the RTZ and how it even had the classical blueish tint to it. Then there were these beings there that he thought were hospital staff and they lead him into a portal and took him to a very dark place. Whenever he would protest and say "where are you taking me?" these wicked beings would say mean things. Like "shut up we are almost there." Eventually he found himself all alone in a dark and very scary place. And he said that he isn't going any further. Then they punched him, and they call ganged up on him. And the more Howard fraught back the more they love it, and fought back even harder. IMO what they really wanted was to feed off of Howard anger and sadness. It wasn't so much that they wanted to punch him, but rather they wanted to get negative emotions out of Howard. After being tormented for what seemed like eternity, as time was very much dilated in such a place, they left. And he was completely devastated to the bone of his being.
Now I am totally convinced that the place Howard Storm went to is the same place that Szaxx calls the bad lands.
Then Howard called out to Jesus since singing a song. Then Jesus came and pulled him out of that place. Now I am not going to debate whether it was really Jesus or not. As far as I am concerned it was some sort of very high being that might have manifested to Howard as Jesus in order to help him and relate to Howard. Then having been pulled out of hell Howard talked to some beings of light among other things. He even asked which is the best religion. But they replied "the religion that brings you closest to God."
Accounts such as these make me realize that some people don't make it to the upper realms, at least not easily. Howard didn't make it since he was deceived by beings that were mean and had the look of plastic on their face, as if they were trying to hide their true nature.
In the end I just have my doubts. I know many astral projectors have never experienced the bad lands. But IMO we must learn about something from those that have had first hand accounts, not those that have never seen such a thing.
Quote from: Xanth on March 03, 2015, 18:05:24
What's another way?
I'm honestly asking... these days I sometimes find it difficult to STOP thinking "consciousness"-first.
Also check out this link bellow. IMO the best expiation for NDE's that are in hell and those that are in heaven is best explained by the bodies biochemistry at the time of death IMO. The reason why is is because psychedelics and the frame of mind someone is in easily determine what type of experience one will have in the spirit world with the psychedelic. I have read of heavenly experiences and very very hellish experiences all made by a psychedelic. So IMO the bodies biochemistry has a lot to do with it, right along with one's beliefs and emotions. I may be wrong I don't know. But denying these experiences isn't helping the astral community to understand them.
Near Death Experiences That Take Place in Hell
http://www.erinpavlina.com/blog/2013/12/near-death-experiences-that-take-place-in-hell/
Quote from: Kzaal on March 03, 2015, 18:23:30
I think that with the technology we have presently and the ones that are going to appear in the 10-15 years, there won't be that necessity of ending the suffering.
I've read a lot of stuff online about the singularity and all the technology we will have by 2025-2035. There will be medicine that will rejuvenate your body, and I think that by then assisted suicide and stuff like that just won't be needed anymore. No one knows exactly what is going to happen in singularity and they are just speculations, but I strongly believe that medicine will be innovated to a point where we can easily repair our bodies and our inner organs in case of a failure.
So people will probably just die of age and no longer of sickness or illness, they will either die of age or not die at all.
Now is it moral? is it good or is it bad? Should we actually die or stay alive eternally? THAT is the question.
Suicide will no longer have it's place by 2035...
Implants will take place, people with mental illness will be followed closely in their thoughts to make sure they don't give up to the bad ones and I think either everyone will start feeling happier or we're gonna face our own destruction.
Personally, now, I still have no point of view on these things. I'm not sure if it's any good or any bad, because we have no idea of telling what's really going to happen. These are based on predictions made by scientists in the domain... I don't feel like mind control would be a great idea, far from it. But this is due to happen one way or the other... Otherwise we'll end by destroying all computers which I don't think will ever happen.
Sure there's probably lots of people who will kill themselves because they can't bear the information or the technology advancing so quickly. But it's like that, humans are not the same as animals trying to evolve, they CONSTANTLY need that evolution state where they have new products or new technology to ease their lives.
Even myself, even if I would love to just throw everything out the window and go live far away in a temple or something like this being alone with my thoughts, it's never going to happen, I'm just too used to this technology. Everyday I connect. So is billions of people...
So now, suicide vanishing... Easier way of life, if possibly, not mind controlled, happiness forever and the medicine to live your life longer and healthy... I could see a good point in there, being more intelligent(with implants) is one of those...
A few things. One no doctor will be able to look at ones thoughts with such a technology unless the person lets them do it. That would be an infringement on their privacy. And I am betting that a lot of people will not have such mind reading technologies used on them since they don't want people looking at what they are thinking much less the government or doctors. Now many will allow doctors to look at there thoughts but many for a long time won't do it. And nobody can force this on them in any civilized nation.
Singularity is a theory. It still has to be proven. But with that I to look forward to such a day hopefully within my lifetime. I read about transhumanism and the power of technology for our minds, and bodies. In fact I think one day science will lead the path for anyone to astral project if they want.
Until they can totally manage suffering to a very high degree suicide will be the best option for many of them if they so choose. So first thing is first. Let's stand for the truth to end suffering when it's unethical.
QuoteA few things. One no doctor will be able to look at ones thoughts with such a technology unless the person lets them do it.
Sadly, I don't think the first ones to be doing that will be doctors, but rather government agencies and business owners (who want first hand knowledge of their clients' thought processes to better target them), and they are certainly not going to ask permission.
The current means to do that exists now, in the form of a scanning laser attached to a functional MRI; the laser itself can be well disguised, and look no more out of place than a camera in the environment. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually haven't already been implemented in a few select venues.
It amounts to taking a snapshot of a person's brain state, and comparing it to a library of known brain states, and figuring out what nouns and verbs they are thinking of, etc.
I hate to give people new things to worry about, but crude mind reading devices in covert applications are already real.
Quote from: Stillwater on March 03, 2015, 21:46:02
Sadly, I don't think the first ones to be doing that will be doctors, but rather government agencies and business owners (who want first hand knowledge of their clients' thought processes to better target them), and they are certainly not going to ask permission.
The current means to do that exists now, in the form of a scanning laser attached to a functional MRI; the laser itself can be well disguised, and look no more out of place than a camera in the environment. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually haven't already been implemented in a few select venues.
It amounts to taking a snapshot of a person's brain state, and comparing it to a library of known brain states, and figuring out what nouns and verbs they are thinking of, etc.
I hate to give people new things to worry about, but crude mind reading devices in covert applications are already real.
I would imagine that that would be a crude form of mind reading.
I've had an MRI, but it's yet to be developed enough for mind reading, so far it's only brain waves and unless they do mind reading test as to know what each of these waves mean there will be a long way before that.
Another thing is the Memory transfer and the clone or holographic transference... These things are already being worked on, maybe not clones but they did say they were developing the holographic transfer and that it would become reality eventually. That could be a meaning to stop death or decay.
But I am not personally too worried about how it would be used, because I don't think anyone could make such devices without proper implanted valors, morals to take place or wisdom. Because anyone could just go and mind control you as much as they want... Privacy would have to be kept, or, any extremely violent thoughts about murder or such should be monitored, a little like in minority report...
Brain hackers would be a worry tho, but if that thing takes place and people are more intelligent, they would be able to counter the viruses by making their own programs in their heads to counter it.
Again just speculations, until we either become robots/cyborgs/androids or we destroy ourselves with biochemical/bacteriological weapons or an atomic war. Unless there is some kind of earth-wide event that takes place and some kind of miraculous thing happens to either stop all this or lead us in the right direction.
Or that Astral Projections/Meditation becomes a really popular subject and everyone end up doing it, being sage and everything...
I was kinda referring to AP/meditation as being the miraculous thing but whatever lol, everything's good.
QuoteI've had an MRI, but it's yet to be developed enough for mind reading, so far it's only brain waves and unless they do mind reading test as to know what each of these waves mean there will be a long way before that.
They have databases of literally tens of thousands of scans which matchup very closely with known thought forms, that they compare against the unknown subject scans.
They have been at this since the 90's; here is a reconstructed dream built with fMRI scans, made famous a few years ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsjDnYxJ0bo
"
The procedure is as follows:
[1] Record brain activity while the subject watches several hours of movie trailers.
[2] Build dictionaries (i.e., regression models) that translate between the shapes, edges and motion in the movies and measured brain activity. A separate dictionary is constructed for each of several thousand points at which brain activity was measured.
(For experts: The real advance of this study was the construction of a movie-to-brain activity encoding model that accurately predicts brain activity evoked by arbitrary novel movies.)
[3] Record brain activity to a new set of movie trailers that will be used to test the quality of the dictionaries and reconstructions.
[4] Build a random library of ~18,000,000 seconds (5000 hours) of video downloaded at random from YouTube. (Note these videos have no overlap with the movies that subjects saw in the magnet). Put each of these clips through the dictionaries to generate predictions of brain activity. Select the 100 clips whose predicted activity is most similar to the observed brain activity. Average these clips together. This is the reconstruction."
Looks like a still very crude technology to me stillwater. I have seen the shows that explain how it works and we still have quite a ways to go.
You dont need a machine to influence someones mind. You need a mind trained in the 'how to' to make people do some things you want. This is fun with the those open to it.
What is possible after a decade of intense training makes you wonder.
The fMRI instrument is already showing things that we take for granted like the vibrations. In one experiment looking for oxygen in the blood, there was a signal detected outside the body.
It may have been another weather balloon or swamp gas if you ask the wrong person though. Lol.
Quote from: PlasmaAstralProjection on March 04, 2015, 13:40:51
Looks like a still very crude technology to me stillwater. I have seen the shows that explain how it works and we still have quite a ways to go.
Yes and no. The most important step of all, that it is possible to do it, has already been clearly demonstrated. These technologies tend to go on exponential growth curves corrollated to computing power.
Here is a famous excerpt that details how something on an exponential curve can more or less go undetected for the majority of its life, and grow mostrously in its final moments:
----------------------------------
"
It's 1pm. Imagine a normal sized football stadium. In this stadium you are sitting on the seat at the very top of the stadium, with the best overview of the whole stadium.
To make things more interesting, imagine the stadium is completely water-tight.
The question is, if a drop of water is added to the stadium and then one minute later it doubles in size to two drops, and then one minute after that it doubles again to 4 drops, and so on.. doubling in size every minute, how much time do you have to leave your seat and get out of the stadium before the water reaches your seat at the very top?
Think about it for a moment. Is it hours, days, weeks, months?
The first drop of water lands right in the middle of the field, at 1pm.
You have exactly until 1:49pm. It takes less than 50 minutes to fill a whole football stadium with water! This is impressive!
But it gets better:
At what time do you think the football stadium is still 93% empty? Take a guess.
The answer: At 1:45pm. So, you sit and watch the drop growing, and after 45 minutes all you see is the playing field covered with water. And then, within four more minutes, the water fills the whole stadium.
This means that you think you are safe because it seems that you have plenty of time left, whereas due to the exponential growth you really have to take immediate action if you want to have any chance of getting out of this situation. "
----------------------------------
Now we know this is the sort of path that biotech has taken in the past as well. The human genome project is a perfect example.
A decade long effort, and it looked like it would take 500 years. Then 85% percent of it gets done in a single year. Now it is trivial to do it again, and would probably take under a day.
(http://drnelson.uthsc.edu/stresa/seqgraph.jpg)
By the time things like this are surfacing in the public eye, they are often very late in their exponential growth curve. Perhaps like the genome project, they can seem like insurmountable goals, that suddenly become trivial in the space of a year.
Quote from: Stillwater on March 04, 2015, 22:49:04
Yes and no. The most important step of all, that it is possible to do it, has already been clearly demonstrated. These technologies tend to go on exponential growth curves corrollated to computing power.
Here is a famous excerpt that details how something on an exponential curve can more or less go undetected for the majority of its life, and grow mostrously in its final moments:
----------------------------------
"It's 1pm. Imagine a normal sized football stadium. In this stadium you are sitting on the seat at the very top of the stadium, with the best overview of the whole stadium.
To make things more interesting, imagine the stadium is completely water-tight.
The question is, if a drop of water is added to the stadium and then one minute later it doubles in size to two drops, and then one minute after that it doubles again to 4 drops, and so on.. doubling in size every minute, how much time do you have to leave your seat and get out of the stadium before the water reaches your seat at the very top?
Think about it for a moment. Is it hours, days, weeks, months?
The first drop of water lands right in the middle of the field, at 1pm.
You have exactly until 1:49pm. It takes less than 50 minutes to fill a whole football stadium with water! This is impressive!
But it gets better:
At what time do you think the football stadium is still 93% empty? Take a guess.
The answer: At 1:45pm. So, you sit and watch the drop growing, and after 45 minutes all you see is the playing field covered with water. And then, within four more minutes, the water fills the whole stadium.
This means that you think you are safe because it seems that you have plenty of time left, whereas due to the exponential growth you really have to take immediate action if you want to have any chance of getting out of this situation. "
----------------------------------
Now we know this is the sort of path that biotech has taken in the past as well. The human genome project is a perfect example.
A decade long effort, and it looked like it would take 500 years. Then 85% percent of it gets done in a single year. Now it is trivial to do it again, and would probably take under a day.
(http://drnelson.uthsc.edu/stresa/seqgraph.jpg)
By the time things like this are surfacing in the public eye, they are often very late in their exponential growth curve. Perhaps like the genome project, they can seem like insurmountable goals, that suddenly become trivial in the space of a year.
I like that metaphor using a football stadium and water. Well see, I know exponential growth can happen much faster in some fields while in others it staggers.
Indeed. Very hard to know for sure, and where biology and especially consciousness studies are concerned, there is very much left to know which could complicate the road.
The thing with this is that, there's always someone stronger to oppose theses kinds of things. Population being one of those.
If somehow, there was a mind changing technology that would make people go bad, things would be noticed very quickly.
People always have memories of their past and we all had very strong challenges in our life.
Someone who's mind is built like rock, would instantly notice the manipulation they are trying to inflict upon their valors and would get rid of the technology.
When you push someone to the limits like that and you have millions of people who's daily lives been a nightmare for many years, and they got out of it miraculously. And they promised themselves that they would never go back to their old habits or old life, you can be sure they will do everything in their power.
As soon as it is noticed and taken into priority, things change fast, media, news, internet... Everyone is noticed.
To me it is possible that they find a way to understand what we are thinking but they can't go and alter your memories without you noticing.
The reason is quite simple, if they want to alter something in your brain, they have to activate that portion of your brain, your memories would flashback to you instantly and you would know something is wrong.
The only good way I see this going is for medically treated people in their terminal state. Or before that when they notice that this person can no longer take care of itself and is handicapped in some way. (a little like in Sword Art Online, if you know what I mean.)
QuoteThe thing with this is that, there's always someone stronger to oppose theses kinds of things. Population being one of those.
If somehow, there was a mind changing technology that would make people go bad, things would be noticed very quickly.
I would want it to be that way, but I think the reality is that there are
profound man-made evils in the world that people accept, or at least do very little to prevent.
A very unpopular example (and this lack of popularity speaks to the strength of the above argument, I feel), is the presence of colossal-scale factory farming that provides in upwards of 90% of the animal products consumed in the industrial world. Billions of animals live short lives of torture in pitch-black cells just big enough for the volume of their bodies. And this has been continual for literal centuries. Sadly I think the presence of such a thing largely unchallenged disproves the idea that humans will reject evil outright.
What I think is closer to reality is that human actions are largely ruled by biological drives and desires.
If we don't first recognize that, we miss the important first step in understanding how to improve the quality of our thoughts and actions.
I don't think it would be so clear-cut and black and white in the beginning as changing the content's of peoples' minds in the way you suggest. That is significantly more difficult than merely browsing brain states, and probably un-needed. I think it would be something much closer to the role "insider information" plays in the stock market. If you can glean certain key facts, that alone provides a massive competitive advantage.
For instance:
Mr Smith walks into the shopping mall. He passes an array jointly owned by the outlets at that location. Mr Smith is a member of a preferred customer club, which grants very steep discounts, in exchange for permission to access his mental states (in order to "better serve" his needs). The array determines he is in a mildly irritated mind-state, but can determine little else. The system also recalls, from his filed banking information, which is linked to his personal profiles, that his wife has recently delivered their second child. The system tentatively decides it will first offer him a small number of updates on maternity and child-care related items, and see how this strategy works out. Mr Smith ignores 2 such adverts, and the system drops the strategy after 20 minutes. Mr Smith is in fact clothing shopping for gifts for a relative's child. But he isn't motivated to spend large amounts of money. At scanning hub two and three, the system catches a glimpse of something interesting: Whenever Mr. Smith is shopping for clothing, he is actually thinking of guitars. The system reasons that perhaps Mr. Smith is being extraordinarily frugal in his other purchases, because he is actually saving up to purchase a new instrument. The system also understands that such purchases have a lot to do with a person's self image. In the future, perhaps at a delay of one month, the system decides it will try a strategy of marketing all of Mr. Smith's required targeted ads by connecting unrelated products to musical culture, and specifically musical culture connected to Smith's chosen tastes reported from his satellite radio preferences. In the next three months, the system logs a 44% increase in impulse purchases which are suggested by this marketing approach with Mr. Smith.I think the above example is pretty subtle. Mr. Smith gave them his permission (albeit in coercion to receive "discounts"). They used this information to do something seemingly innocuous. But the reality is that what really happened is that the system leveraged a competitive advantage to greatly increase its profit margin. Consider slightly less subtle examples, without permission, and for higher stakes. I think it is easy to see how merely knowing a person's personal thoughts, without the need to alter them as you suggest above, is more than enough to produce a favorable outcome to the reading party. I think you might be able to imagine such examples without me needing to illustrate those.