You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

adamzerner comments on What do rationalists think about the afterlife? - Less Wrong Discussion

-16 Post author: adamzerner 13 May 2014 09:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (99)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 15 May 2014 04:13:51AM -2 points [-]

What if they're still experiencing and feeling things, but are just incapable of communicating this to us at the time, and are incapable of remembering it?

A hypothesis thus described is untestable. Moreover, it's inconsequential: the observed result is the same regardless of whether the hypothesis is true or not. In such a case, the hypothesis can be safely ignored because it adds nothing to our models.

Comment author: adamzerner 15 May 2014 04:30:53AM 0 points [-]

1) Untestable doesn't mean wrong.

2) What about the possibility that we just can't do a good job of measuring peoples' consciousness given our level of technology?