Comment Re:Fuck ads (Score 1) 660
There might be a good point in there, but it's blinded by your arrogant entitled attitude.
There might be a good point in there, but it's blinded by your arrogant entitled attitude.
That would suck if it's the former. If you hate when people bitch about getting the flu after they get the flu shot, just wait...
... I don't care what age I go.
I drink, and I like it.
I smoke (cannabis), and I like it.
I smoke (tobacco) sometimes, and I like it.
I really enjoy good food, and maybe I overindulge sometimes.
I'm 23, going on 24, and if I make it to 60 under the same quality of life I have now, I'll be peachy fucking keen.
My mother has Crohn's, and it almost killed her. So I can sympathize with what you are going through.
Have you ever considered medicinal marijuana? I've only done preliminary research, but it seems like it's something worth trying. At the very least, it might help your quality of living so that you won't want to end it.
I implore you, if you are so desperate as to take your own life, to first consider the psychological aid of Psilocybin (aka, "magic") mushrooms. They have done wonders for others with chronic illnesses like cancer, and if not changing your mind completely, they might just put you at mental and spiritual ease before euthanasia. At least give it some research.
Good luck to whatever you do.
If you are 50 years old and the average life expectancy is 80, then when you're 51 the average life expectancy is 81.3, and at 52 your projected death age is 83, you can see that modern medicine is the elixir of life.
The problem with that is that updated life expectancies seem to apply only to newborns. After all, if I lived through all the shit that plagues humanity, that's going to decrease my life expectancy. The newborns, never living through it due to technological and social advances, are unscathed and as a result have a higher expectancy than I.
So unless technological advances can erase past destructive experience (damage to lungs from second hand smoke, for instance), updated life expectancies have little to no relevance to us already living.
I'm not religious, so I believe that my entire mind (no soul required) is governed by the logical patterns made by the neurons and electrical impulses in my brain. There is no good reason a computer cannot reproduce these structures. I think that a simulation of consciousness is as conscious as the biological model it is based on - after all, what does it matter if the machine that houses my mind's pattern isn't biological in nature?
If I make a copy of a program on my computer, the two copies are not the same instance. In other words: you will still die, but your clone will continue to live in its electronic brain.
Replace Lord with Universe.
Same thing. Of course I'm a pantheist.
..if you define pain as a physiological response to damaging stimuli. Animals need that in order to survive.
The question is does their form of pain "hurt"? We'll never know that. After all, we don't even know why pain hurts for us humans; all we know is that it does indeed hurt and is not something we like to experience (unless you're masochistic).
This problem is at root a philosophical one. It's impossible to know how things are through the eyes of another. See qualia. I don't know what red looks like to you, nor do I know how a flame touching your finger feels like to you. I can guess, because we have similar physical and mental faculties, but it's still just a guess.
After Goliath's defeat, giants ceased to command respect. - Freeman Dyson