Thread: Do inanimate objects have a "life"?

Originally Posted by Noogah

I've been thinking lately. I've heard people say junk like "it lives in your heart" all my life, but just lately I started thinking about it. Although this seems like a common philosophy, does anyone here feel that it should be taken literally?

Do you mean "common expression"?

Originally Posted by Noogah

I wonder how many people actually dedicate their time to this show? I also have a character. Sort of an alter ego, which is very real to me. I've even gone so far as to have discussions with him.(I hope this doesn't make me crazy)

Talking to yourself make you crazy? Naahhh, everyone does that a little bit. I wouldn't worry about it. Now if you believed the earth was 6000 years old, thaaaat would make you crazy.

Originally Posted by Noogah

What I'm trying to say is, by dedicating part of our time, life, mind, and soul to an object, character, or even a plush toy, it seems that in a sense they have a kind of "life" inside of you. I mean, in a movie, when a character dies, you feel genuine emotion, as though part of you is gone. By hundreds of people lending a partition of their mind and soul to a character, or inanimate object, it seems to me that the object gains a sort of "life"

Anybody agree?

No but I really don't understand the question so if you rephrased it, I might. I think you're taking an analogy and arguing like it's real.

I'll ignore that snide remark about me believing the earth is 6000 years old. If you ask me, believing that the earth is 12,000,000,000 years old is equally as rediculous.

BUUUUUUUUUT you didnt ask.

To rephrase it, by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life. I'm not saying I believe it, but I thought that it was worth discussing.

Originally Posted by Noogah

What I'm trying to say is, by dedicating part of our time, life, mind, and soul to an object, character, or even a plush toy, it seems that in a sense they have a kind of "life" inside of you. I mean, in a movie, when a character dies, you feel genuine emotion, as though part of you is gone. By hundreds of people lending a partition of their mind and soul to a character, or inanimate object, it seems to me that the object gains a sort of "life"

Anybody agree?

when I was seven years old I watched this anime. from the moment the main characters came on screen, I understood them. I loved them.

but it was also an adult anime with a dramatic ending that gave me a nightmare that very night. the nightmare was so horrifying, the only thing I remember was the sound of my own scream as I woke up.

well thanks to that combination, the characters have lived in my head since. if I let my imagination play, they are very life like. so life like....

there is this particular dream-character. and when I dream with him, I always identify him as my male half. 'he' is literally the other me. if I become lucid, 'he' disappears. And nothing I can do can summon him.

The only thing I can think of is that he is literally a part of me. And when I become lucid my male half no longer exists outside of me, because I am him. what am I babbling about??

well...one time in a dream, I spent the entire time looking for one of the anime-characters. when I found the character, I felt something. It's hard to describe. It's felt like finding a soul mate. It felt like finding a part of myself.

but after I became lucid, he vanishes before my eyes. Just like my 'male half'.

****************




why do we cry over mere imaginary characters? the answer lies with the subconscious. the subconscious doesn't make reality distinctions. what is being experienced is always 'real'.

so all imaginary characters that you love, are 'real' to your subconscious



now the fun part is.....why would the subconscious daydream about an imaginary character? Well, I believe the answer is metaphysical. I believe the answer has to do with reality being created by thought.

in this belief, humans do not have the power to create life *because you can not create energy*. we can only give life. by means of giving a part of our own consciousness *living energy* to something else

enter the obsessed fan - subconsciously trying to give life to an imaginary character. the end result is a thoughtform. a tulpa still living on the mental realm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulpa

all thoughtform entities are the same. they exist and live only because a consciousness thinks *gives energy* to them. what does this mean? it's hungry for your attention.

think I'm crazy?? probably. but my story doesn't end here





in fact, I'm so crazy, I'm willing to say that the two characters in my head.......don't just live in my head. they are alive in a mental realm, and they are hungry

why did I come to this crazy conclusion?

once apon a time I found this amazing fanart and fancomics. I looked at this fanart...and I felt this weird buzz of energy...this fanart looks a lot like my imagination!!!

It was weird..Too weird. Like someone came inside my head and made illustrations of it.

Now the artist doesn't speak english. And I don't speak japanese. What were the chances that these two characters would 'play' the same in our imagination?

And a strange thought came to me....what if the imagination in my head isn't mine???? what if the imagination in my head..is the SAME imagination she is experiencing?

What if these imaginary characters..aren't so imaginary?

I told you that when I was seven years old I had a nightmare after watching the anime. I told you that I loved the characters. But what I forgot to tell you was..I was not obsessed with the anime until I woke up that morning from my nightmare. It was the nightmare that made me obsessed. Simultaneously, I hated the characters. I hated the anime. I hated all of it. I hated it because I was obsessed.

And already at the age of seven I would have told you I hated it because it wouldn't leave my mind.


Something is wrong and I decided I needed to remember the nightmare to understand. The only nightmare in my entire life that I could not remember any of it upon waking.




Last year was my first attempt to recall the nightmare.

In a dream I shout out that I am ready to revisit the nightmare. Instantly a portal appears in my dream. And I know that all I have to do is fly in, and I would revisit the memory, understand, and move on with my life.

As I fly up to the portal two dark male entities drag me down. And pin me to my bed. They threaten me. Their voices were indescribable, barely words, more like sub-human growling. Low, throaty, dark voices. I couldn't stand the sound, I had to wake myself up.

I sickening feeling came to me when I woke up.......because there are two characters living in my head, and they are male. A disgusting thought, that all this time I had been giving my precious energy to these two dark entities, that have plagued my subconscious, since the nightmare I had at age seven!!

This is what made me believe that they were tulpas in the astral/mental realm. And not just figments of my imagination.

The problem? They aren't mine. I didn't come up with them. I didn't create them. The tulpas were originally created by the anime author. With millions of fans giving them energy, they were 'alive' and hungry long before I saw the anime. If you read up on tibetan tulpa stories, most of the tulpas have the same fate...they become 'dark'.

But what about the dream where I felt that the Character loved me back as I loved him? That Character was NOT the tulpa. That Character was me. The part of myself that was stolen by the tulpa, and I was reclaiming that part of me back

one down, one more to go

ps, I still can't recall the nightmare

Reminds me of a pretty good Korean horror movie called "The Doll Master." I believe the movie is on youtube in its entirety, with subtitles.

It's all about dolls that were loved so much by children that they developed a soul. Then, the children grew up and abandoned them, and the dolls were so hurt that they started killing their previous owners.

There's one very memorable character in the movie, a doll played by a really interesting looking young woman. The emotions she feels, as a doll, just give me goosebumps.

Wow! And I thought I was the first person to actually give this much thought.

My imagionary character is dear to me. If I knew that he died, I might actually...cry. But neither of us are pushovers. We both argue, and his opinions differ from mine. He gives me good advice(More like, reminding me of advice I already know...lol) but we act just like good friends.

Originally Posted by Noogah

I'll ignore that snide remark about me believing the earth is 6000 years old. If you ask me, believing that the earth is 12,000,000,000 years old is equally as rediculous.

Agreed! That's why I believe that it's 4.5 billion years old along with most other intelligent and educated people.

Originally Posted by Noogah

To rephrase it, by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life. I'm not saying I believe it, but I thought that it was worth discussing.

Do you mean like idol worship?

If you mean 'life' as in 'having conscious percepts', then no, I only think objects with neural networks (e.g. brains) or other similar systems can be conscious.

And the Earth isn't 6,000 years old or 12,000,000,000 years old. It's 4,500,000,000 years old. People believe this because of this thing called 'evidence'. Evidence like radiometric dating.

Okay, let's drop the age of the earth junk.

Anyways, I realize that they aren't concious, and seperate entities other than yourself, but if they use your brain power, it seems like they are oh...I dunno...another person somehow. Anyways, I'm not saying that I actually believe it, I was just thinking about it.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Okay, let's drop the age of the earth junk.

Anyways, I realize that they aren't concious, and seperate entities other than yourself, but if they use your brain power, it seems like they are oh...I dunno...another person somehow. Anyways, I'm not saying that I actually believe it, I was just thinking about it.

That's called personification. It's a literary mechanic.

Originally Posted by Noogah

I'll ignore that snide remark about me believing the earth is 6000 years old. If you ask me, believing that the earth is 12,000,000,000 years old is equally as rediculous.

BUUUUUUUUUT you didnt ask.

To rephrase it, by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life. I'm not saying I believe it, but I thought that it was worth discussing.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

"This value is derived from several different lines of evidence."

I know evidence is a touchy subject for catholics, but I had to use extreme measures of verification so I apologize for the intimidation of what is "fact", so to speak.

"by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life."

epic new signature.

Originally Posted by Dreams4Free

by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life

If so, I request that you include what follows:

Originally Posted by Noogah

To rephrase it, by dedicating a portion of your life to something, it seems as though it has gained some of your life. Thus, it has a life. I'm not saying I believe it, but I thought that it was worth discussing.

Originally Posted by Noogah

I've been thinking lately. I've heard people say junk like "it lives in your heart" all my life, but just lately I started thinking about it. Although this seems like a common philosophy, does anyone here feel that it should be taken literally?

What lives in our heart..?

When I was a toddler, I had a stuffed toy. It was a blue dog, and I loved it. I treated it like a human. And I watched an anime lately, and was thinking

Anthropomorphism.

I wonder how many people actually dedicate their time to this show? I also have a character. Sort of an alter ego, which is very real to me. I've even gone so far as to have discussions with him.(I hope this doesn't make me crazy)

Fantasy role-play.

What I'm trying to say is, by dedicating part of our time, life, mind, and soul to an object, character, or even a plush toy, it seems that in a sense they have a kind of "life" inside of you. I mean, in a movie, when a character dies, you feel genuine emotion, as though part of you is gone. By hundreds of people lending a partition of their mind and soul to a character, or inanimate object, it seems to me that the object gains a sort of "life"

Anybody agree?

It gains a sort of "life" in the same way that meditating about topics do or concentrating on traumatic events. It does not make them real, of course, but the behaviour for humans to emotionally attach and interact with all things is ubiquitous.

At length, I do agree, I would just humbly remember that they are still called "in-animate" for a reason (remembering that animate is latin for life and in negates it).

I also think that there are people who are too quick to make prejudicial remarks on others of different beliefs or ventures. They should also kindly remember that being perceptive and civil is a vital human quality.

~

I think you conveyed what I was unable to convey.

Thankyou. Your the medical/psychological type, huh?

Originally Posted by Noogah

I think you conveyed what I was unable to convey.

Thankyou. Your the medical/psychological type, huh?

lol yes, thank you.

Cherish the ability to emotionally divulge into things.. too many people are incapable of letting go...

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

I also think that there are people who are too quick to make prejudicial remarks on others of different beliefs or ventures. They should also kindly remember that being perceptive and civil is a vital human quality.
~

I agree that being perceptive is a vital human quality. I also believe that being civil when appropriate is a vital human quality. I agree that a diversity of beliefs is critical to the advancement of human knowledge which is also a vital human quality. In his time in the R/S forum, Noogah has done nothing but demonstrate himself to be a fundamentalist, young earth creationist. I have zero patience for them. As I have explained elsewhere, they do nothing to add meaningful diversity to the spectrum of human perception.

They, and Noogah is no exception, consistently lie, distort facts and engage in otherwise dishonest debate tactics.

Furthermore, a significant percentage of them attempt to get their filth taught in schools and home "school" their own children to "protect" them from knowledge, hence isolating them from intelligent society and denying them the right to have the best answers that we have to the question "What am I and how did I get here?" This is one of the fundamental human questions and the search for its answer has motivated the greatest human beings in history, from Buddha to Darwin.

As I have said elsewhere, I have no truck with these people. If they demonstrate a willingness to learn, I will do my part to teach them but I have never met one that was willing to:

1. Engage in honest debate
2. Accept basic facts
3. Modify views in light of having been presented with facts
4. Learn

The last three are also vital human qualities and are the reason that we are not sleeping in caves tonight. So if loathing creationists makes me a bigot, that's fine. In that case, I'm a bigot. I'm neither ashamed of it, nor have any intention of changing my views on the subject unless someone can present me with evidence that they are anything but lying, ignorant, dishonest and manipulative toads.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I agree that being perceptive is a vital human quality. I also believe that being civil when appropriate is a vital human quality. I agree that a diversity of beliefs is critical to the advancement of human knowledge which is also a vital human quality. In his time in the R/S forum, Noogah has done nothing but demonstrate himself to be a fundamentalist, young earth creationist. I have zero patience for them. As I have explained elsewhere, they do nothing to add meaningful diversity to the spectrum of human perception.

They, and Noogah is no exception, consistently lie, distort facts and engage in otherwise dishonest debate tactics.

Furthermore, a significant percentage of them attempt to get their filth taught in schools and home "school" their own children to "protect" them from knowledge, hence isolating them from intelligent society and denying them the right to have the best answers that we have to the question "What am I and how did I get here?" This is one of the fundamental human questions and the search for its answer has motivated the greatest human beings in history, from Buddha to Darwin.

As I have said elsewhere, I have no truck with these people. If they demonstrate a willingness to learn, I will do my part to teach them but I have never met one that was willing to:

1. Engage in honest debate
2. Accept basic facts
3. Modify views in light of having been presented with facts
4. Learn

The last three are also vital human qualities and are the reason that we are not sleeping in caves tonight. So if loathing creationists makes me a bigot, that's fine. In that case, I'm a bigot. I'm neither ashamed of it, nor have any intention of changing my views on the subject unless someone can present me with evidence that they are anything but lying, ignorant, dishonest and manipulative toads.

Richard Dawkins would be proud.



~

Originally Posted by O'nus

Richard Dawkins would be proud.

~

I'm more of a Dennet man myself. At any rate, are you going to dismiss it or address it? Or at least point me to a thread where you have addressed it or a youtube video or something? Or do you just not have a point?

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I'm more of a Dennet man myself. At any rate, are you going to dismiss it or address it. Or at least point me to a thread where you have addressed it or a youtube video or something? Or do you just not have a point?

I don't disagree with you. My point was simply that some people are too quick to become aggressive with fundamentalists and only confirm their initial prejudices; that scientists are aggressive and hostile. What you said would only confirm their reason for being closed-minded in the first place. It takes a lot of patience to deal with certain people who refuse to listen, but you must strain and strive to wait for the opportunity when they are willing to listen and actually discuss rather than restrict and rehearse their own prejudices. Do not falter.

What do you think...?

As for Dan Dennet, I am very happy you mentioned him; he is one of my greatest inspirations for philosophy that I have quoted and referenced to many times!

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

I don't disagree with you. My point was simply that some people are too quick to become aggressive with fundamentalists and only confirm their initial prejudices; that scientists are aggressive and hostile. What you said would only confirm their reason for being closed-minded in the first place. It takes a lot of patience to deal with certain people who refuse to listen, but you must strain and strive to wait for the opportunity when they are willing to listen and actually discuss rather than restrict and rehearse their own prejudices. Do not falter.

I see both sides to this. It seems that the error is in thinking that they ignore science because they perceive scientists as aggressive and hostile and not because science is a threat to their fundamentalist beliefs. That is a problem with their beliefs not shared by the religions that respect the fundamental property of science: Once it puts its feet down in a domain, it is the king of that domain. Once something is empirical fact, it is undeniable. Once we have a theory that predicts empirical facts correctly, any other system of thought must yield. The Dali Llama recognizes this for instance. Even the last three popes have.

It seems to me that you're making a political point: If you want to persuade people, be nice to them. It's a good point. I am unable to refute it on a logical level at the moment.

Originally Posted by O'nus

As for Dan Dennet, I am very happy you mentioned him; he is one of my greatest inspirations for philosophy that I have quoted and referenced to many times!
~

No "Hard Problem", eh? I'm still unsure of that one.

You assume to much. One cannot lie if he believes he is telling the truth. You see, from my stance, you are telling lies. But since you do not believe you are telling a lie, you are not. It just means that you are misinformed.

I think that you must have met with a REAL jerk creationist to get as bitter about us as you are. Am I correct?

Originally Posted by Noogah

I think that you must have met with a REAL jerk creationist to get as bitter about us as you are. Am I correct?

*coughs*

I've not been a jerk.

Originally Posted by Noogah

I've not been a jerk.

No, you've been a determinedly misinformed idiot who has no idea what he is talking about and who refuses to learn or at least attempt to partake in honest debate. Instead, you've pulled strawman after strawman, yelled, whined and made up excuses for your continued ignorance and have not once conceded defeat even when you have been proved wrong over and over and over again in multiple threads. What I want to know is-- Why? Why even bother coming back? If you aren't going to read and be honest or at least attempt to learn, then we really don't want you here. These forums don't need pages and pages of articulate posts followed by "NO U". If you want to spout bullshit and have people agree with you, then go to a creationist forum where most of the people there are as misinformed and stupid as you.

Originally Posted by Noogah

You assume to much. One cannot lie if he believes he is telling the truth. You see, from my stance, you are telling lies. But since you do not believe you are telling a lie, you are not. It just means that you are misinformed.

Are you saying that you are not telling a lie if you believe what you are saying, even if it has no evidence, is true? Because even if it seems abundantly true, if you have no support or evidential reasoning for what you are saying, you are simply conjecturing. And if you say that you have evidential reasoning when you know that you do not but still say it anyway.. then you are lying.

~