Take care

I took that metaphorically

"Literally" is what you just said

It’s sadly very true

Same :(

😭😭😭😭

You are not either

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HA HA HAAAAAAAH HAH

Also to the phrase, "You've really let yourself go." Well, yeah. We kinda don't have a choice.

The heart is istill the same

when I was 7 years old I replaced my favorite k-pop band member

Love this 👌

**NCT Dream suddenly disintegrate** **Super Junior fade out of existence** **Apink spontaneously explode**

related fun fact. you'll never look better than you do today. So as you get older, and get horrified at what's happening in the mirror, try to appreciate that it's the best you that you'll ever see.

What if you dont get horrified

@@wendysgarden4283 thx now I feel depressed

That's terrifying, thanks!

No way I never would've guess that

@Ochako kun it’s crazy how I don’t even know some of the things my body does it just does it.. and who taught it? The brain? But who taught the brain to teach them? Lol

@@1kwithabunchofplaylist..382 If God is all knowing, then that means he knows if someone will go to hell before they are created. Why would any God that is "loving" create someone who is bound to burn in the end? To me, it sounds quite cruel and something that a psychopath would do

@@GamingManiacMan hell isnt real actually humans created that to scare people into paying churches to "guarantee" being saved. Not real

Ok people should really stop talking about religion here

@@Htiy genetics!! Lol

F

F

Rip

i'm way ahead of ya

Cringe

perfect, i like that too! thank you for sharing!

The important part of ourselves is not the particular matter, but how the matter is organized. Even as cells come and go, the organization is maintained.

Dude that is smart!!! I've been struggling with the concept of personal identity ever since I watched the Crash Course philosophy video on it. It think you might have just provided the beginning of the answer, thank you so much!!

@@Matthew-rl3zf I got u fam, keep on doubting

@@andremoreiragraca Thanks brother, my motto is follow your doubts not your dreams

Good thing I touch the inner layer😏

@@moneymatt1691 sus

*touches your wounds*

How about the orifices?

I see dead people.

Ye I feel dead

Lmaoooo 😂😂😂

I work retail. You speak facts

Tee hee hee

Damn that’s sad bro ruok

And yet here you are

If you LITERALLY died inside you wouldn't be able to comment ya know

@@DelLego I said 'literally" as a joke. The video says a part of me is always dying. Hence, the statement which I commented is technically correct. It signifies two meanings. Dying inside figuratively, and also brings light to the fact tht parts of my body is regenerating.

@@DelLego But our cells are literally dying inside tho.

@@tamaghnosaha2520 Yeah now that I think about it, I suppose technically you're right. I just tired of seeing people using "literally" wrong

My hand dies when i sleep on it

Yes it looks on your profile photo

Hey fellow deadman, give me deadman high five

I’m seeing this coming

Screaming

i think to find out how much HE is alive

😇

I was wondering why the metaphor was with a knife…

my mind rembembering the scene from wandavision finale

My mind went a bit further with associations till very "John dies at the end" =)

ribs grow back

@@boldCactuslad _no zhey don't_

For anyone in the UK - Trigger's Broom: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gqeYa6uj3rzFlY0.html

i want a better offer. a much better offer.

Then based on your research, well over 80 to 90 percent of each of us has been replaced already.

Does that considers the atoms trading?😌

I can HAVE 3-4 hearts in a lifetime!

Legit??

Is this data from whatsapp University?

Kick the Joe now on mobile!

@@caroline6218 lol that def should be a game on mobile. I would wanna play.

... or have you?

science meets philosophy

Or did you?

All I can say, what a fantastic investment, one single buy, plus spare parts "only". lol ;)

@@fernandomerida3752 *vsauce music plays*

😂

Don't try it you will be blacklisted by The devs himself

Your brain isn't "you" since the individual identity is a social construct and therefore not an actual thing.

@Sentient Flower Wrong address. The postmodernists’ party is two blocks down the road.

@@sentientflower7891 ... wrote your brain.

@@agnesfonmarten you must know that you aren't an actual thing. The illusion of Self is created initially by the gift of a name.

@@ooooneeee wrote a brain, which isn't the same as claiming it was written by "my" brain since the brain organizes itself begins to operate before any sense of Self begins.

i've honestly thought about if starts technically count as being alive. they do have the fusion stuff going on which is keeping them as stars

A freaking potato just became the president.

@@megamillionfreak Just barely alive

okie here is a thing.. technically speaking sun does ticks out few criteria of being alive.. it uses energy, it has a complex structure it has a temperature which regulates and to some extent on can say it even reproduces because after it will die the the new elements will be used up to create more stuff in the universe..... Personally i don`t consider scientific criteria because you will generally hit a fuzzy area if you try to progress like this where things will seem alive and dead at same time... i believe it would be better if one just says whatever moves than it is alive... if you look like this than there isn`t anything that isn`t moving... so everything is alive and you don`t hit a point where you see dead chemicals creating life..

The sun is not alive, no star is alive the fact people are even considering this proves how slow humanity really has become

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, very funny

I didn’t know red blood cells was a micro cellular organism, lol

@@Kophe3e Dont just 'hope' for this channel to grow: Actively recommend-it-around and share it as much as you can. And you may as well ask me for some recommendations for science-youtuber and all such. Cause why not. The Learning never ends anyway.

lmao don't forget platelets

cough cough chemistry cough cough

cringe

@@laser2144 shut up 🥺🤧

How are you doing inside emotionally? How old are you? Do you even know what you are talking about?

@@afroblender8023 I am not so great...... I am 19 yrs old.... and yeah ik what I'm talking bout.......

@@notsiddhi2820 hmmm why are you dying inside?

Nice pfp bro

I can see that resemblance.

Yeah I see that

Ha i understood that reference!

I see it more like a naturalistic ecosystem, our cells are just like raccoons and possum, they do what they were designed, evolved to do, eat, excrete, procreate, die Our bodies are super complex forests, we're the parts interact and in the grand scheme of things contribute to the whole

It's a dystopia to contribute for the community that keeps you alive?

@@joroc well it all depends how much you anthromorphise your cells. Are they akin to slaves, indentured servants, wild animals, fungi on a forest floor, etc. Each commenter has their own metaphor which changes the moral evaluation when they “step back and think about it”.

Cancer are simply cells that refuse to die and thus cause problems to others

Ah, I've found a fellow Techno fan

I was looking for this comme t

if you copied every single thing of information in your brain and it is transfered to a machine just to let your brain die, would that mean that you are dead or you are still alive inside of the machine (full consciousness in de machine)

no no no.... he's got a point

@@paulogarcia9557 now

@@paulogarcia9557 There would be no continuity between your brain and the information copied into the machine. You would be dead. It would like tracing a drawing and destroying the original

@@paulogarcia9557 Are digital photos the same photons that hitted the camera at that time. But being reproduced on a screen makes it not that original photo anymore.

Haha

@@DyslexicMitochondria your username made me click on your profile. Your channel is a hidden gem bro

Fr you're spitting facts

@@DyslexicMitochondria you're channel needs to be more famous its a hidden gem 💎

and our perception is our reality. and our brain controls our perception.

To me living beings and inanimate objects are different. I say the ship becomes new when there is more new parts than the original ship. Than it's just a replica. For living beings your cells make new ones and such. Buts that's a process that happens with in your own body. If you pop your arm off and replace it with someone else's it's not your original arm. The arm now belongs to you. But it wasn't yours you replaced it from an outside source. Now if say the ship regenerated itself I'd say it'd the same ship.

people get mad at me when I say learning is biasing.

@@XWierdThingsHappenX "living beings and inanimate objects are different" no, they aren't. living beings are "inanimate" objects with some behavior. there's no such a thing as inanimate in this universe, there's movement everywhere, everything is changing. Living things are just a kind of changing behavior with feedback that keeps looping and repeating itself. Its more like a spectrum between living and "dead". Who say rocks aren't alive in the millions of years scale, we can't see them changing because we live for so little time.

@@XWierdThingsHappenX this is such a binary thinking... worth of computers, not humans "I say the ship becomes new when there is more new parts than the original ship." Parts don't matter, what matters is the abstract structure, that's why you could replace all the parts and still have that ship. 50% of parts replaced is such an arbitrary number... This western foundation of thinking, this essentialism and immutable "purity". Yet, people believe in souls... go figure What's a soul if not the abstract mathematical structure of a thing, that's what defines it, not the real parts. Complex things have no essential formula, they are complex dynamic systems, you can't reduce complexity. Damn reductionism , that is, bullshit. You have to study things on the proper level of complexity, you switch between levels, you never try to break things into smaller things. That only works for computers and mathematics, not for complex dynamic systems, which living things are. The total is always greater than sum of the parts in complex systems. That's what leads people to hopelessly try to separate things into categories like "life" and "inanimate", when actually both are the same thing, the categories are made up, they are arbitrary, such binary reductionism leads to no understanding. Life is made of chemistry which is made of "inanimate" matter. But chemistry is much dynamic, just go see some things exploding, that's chemistry, life is controlled explosion that keeps burning. Even wonder why we consume oxygen ? its because we are slowly burning things, that's what mitochondria does. You only need a self-fulfilling chemical reaction to evolve over time to create life. Life is not different from any other chemical reaction, except in complexity, its much more complex, has much more abstraction layers on top of each other, each of it giving birth to new complex irreducible behavior on top of the previous layer, but its just chemistry on the bottom, not a different "magical" thing. The magic is the universal complexity. Yet, no part of it could evolve individually by chance, that's when people make the error. But still, if it starts very simple, it evolves in irreducible complexity from the very "beginning", if you can call a begin. Was it when the planet was formed ? when it cooled down, or its already the result of the complex chemical reactions of that big ball of matter that formed earth cooling down, where's the beginning of the reaction ? was it when the Sun exploded for the first time in its nuclear reaction from space dust ? perhaps... Chemistry only needs gradients in thermodynamics to work... That's the only thing it needs, and that was created in the first milliseconds of the Universe, it all goes back to the singularity. Everything is like the same thing, its pure energy ! That's the soul of the Universe. Universe itself is alive in is uttermost complexity.

That's an interesting thought.

To take that one step further. If a perfect clone was created of a specific person and the original person was killed off, is the clone still the same person? Technically yes, but emotionally i might still treat the clone differently😂

@@bobikoart but you're qualia would decease due the break in consciousness continous

Lmao I thought I was only who noticed that 😂

A blood 'cell' is a misnomer. you'd have to read up about why it's called a cell when the biological understanding is something that has a nucleus, which a blood 'cell' does not - the correct word for a 'blood cell' is a erythrocyte.

It's a nonkaryotic cell.

wdym... it worked! (spoiler alert)

I'm calling it, if I ever watch wandavision I'm going to have a flashback of reading this comment whenever whatever this is about comes up

Let’s see how many subs I can gain from this comment currently at 61

Lol

I believe the question is getting at where we should draw the line. At what point should we start calling it smth else?

I think the key to the Ship of Theseus to me is the line between maintenance and rebuilding. If every year the ship operates I need to rip off a few planks that have rotted and replace them, most people would agree that the ship has continuity and it hasn’t really changed even after years and every bit being replaced. But if the ship sunk and then a year later just the bow washed up on some shore and I rebuilt the rest of the ship, it would seem more that I’ve built something new, using a small bit of something older. Some people might say, well… there’s still a continuity, but most people would also think it reasonable that upon completing this rebuild I give this ship a new name, and that it would have something of a new identity. Still tied to the old one, but nonetheless distinct. I think it’s sort of, as long as the action of replacing only affects a minority of the whole at any one time, it’s fine.

That's the whole point of the thought experiment, though. You aren't really making an argument, it just kills the whole line of thinking. If everything is as we define it, then philosophy and debate is pointless and why the hell are you even commenting? The whole thing boils down to the question, where is the boundary between thinking it's just being maintained and when does it become new? Where should our definition draw the line? Please stop thinking you are edgy, cool or helping any debate/thought experiment ever with this kind of logic. It's similiar to the religious filling in stuff they don't know with god. It just kills the discussion and serves no real purpose. Everyone capable of this level of critical thought understands how language works.

@@BD-yl5mh it really depends on the view of the persons involved. If more then half the people interacting with the object call it by a specific name (and it has no way of disputing that or naming itself) then that's more or less the name. Philosophy seems to try to think about something more then it needs to to come to a conclusion. Sure we could define "The ship isn't the ship of theseus anymore if 51% are changed out by new/other material" but in the end it's the people who still call it "the ship of theseus" who give it that specific identity until enough people change it to a different identity. (I'm not saying if enough people call a rock a bird that now it should'Ve be able to fly and chirp, what I'm saying is if enough people call a rock a bird then the name changes, nothing else)

@@DarthObscurity What's the purpose of arguing about the name of something? Because it's really only that if we only argue about the identity of something. The identity is that of which enough (most) people give to an object (a person can normally try and articulate their identity and we should accept that one, even if we don't agree) What I'm saying is: in the real world we more or less just give something an identity until enough people change their mind/call it something else. Almost noone in the real world argues about how much changed of something especially if they don't even know how much changed (or don't care) just to give it an identity. What I'm saying is: I'm me and my name is Quintar for as long as I (and others) are willing to call me Quintar. No matter of how many parts of myself I change will change that fact until I decide to change my identity/name.

Let’s see how many subs I can gain from this comment currently at 61

Me too man, me too.

that feeling ia gonna go away bro, stay strong

Ah, man of culture

Memories of a dead child, a dead teen, a dead adult and an old person