• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Am I the same entity or person from the moment I was born?

Emre_1974tr said:
It's a sad truth that across the Star Trek universe—in its films, shows, and comics—teleportation is a guise for murder. Mr. Spock and all the others were unfortunately destroyed the very first time they were beamed up. Everyone we've seen since then are nothing more than replicas.
Click to expand...
So? Star Trek is as much a fantasy as Islam or Christianity.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
Islam is the only truth among them. Even atheism is a fantasy, but Islam is real.
Click to expand...
And if you believe that I have some swamp land for you to buy.

Atheism isn't a thing. It is simply the non acceptance of the go proposition so far proposed. It is the default position.

You have been indoctrinated into Islam just as people elsewhere are indoctrinated into other religious cults. If you were born and raised in India, you would likely be a Hindu or Sikh. If it was Italy, you'd be a Roman Catholic or where I am from a Baptist.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
It's a sad truth that across the Star Trek universe—in its films, shows, and comics—teleportation is a guise for murder. Mr. Spock and all the others were unfortunately destroyed the very first time they were beamed up. Everyone we've seen since then are nothing more than replicas.
Click to expand...
No. Star Trek canon rejects (or rather, narratively avoids) the murder model of transportation. Transporters are considered safe and convenient, despite early misgivings (especially in Enterprise but also from Bones in TOS), which were about the technology malfunctioning and not the existential horror of being routinely murdered and recreated. Continuity of self is preserved.

Don't get in the pool with nerds, unless you're ready to drown in trivia, outswim logic, and get splashed by obscure references.
 
Last edited:
Emre_1974tr said:
It's a sad truth that across the Star Trek universe—in its films, shows, and comics—teleportation is a guise for murder. Mr. Spock and all the others were unfortunately destroyed the very first time they were beamed up. Everyone we've seen since then are nothing more than replicas.
Click to expand...

Mourning corner :(. Mr. Spock, Captain Kirk, Christopher Pike, Captain Picard...and the others... they were all destroyed. They believed what the foolish scientists and philosophers said and passed on to the afterlife by tearing themselves to pieces in the means of destruction called teleportation. They were good people, they didn't deserve this. They paid a bitter price for believing what the experts told them like sheep.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
No, atheism is also a religion. To believe that Allah does not exist is a belief. And it is a superstitious belief. In contrast, knowing that Allah exists is true knowledge.
Click to expand...
How can something that professes no religious beliefs, thoughts or ideologies be a religion?

Atheism is a religion in the same way not collecting stamps is a hobby (IIRC that juxtaposition is from Hitchens).
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
How can something that professes no religious beliefs, thoughts or ideologies be a religion?

Atheism is a religion in the same way not collecting stamps is a hobby (IIRC that juxtaposition is from Hitchens).
Click to expand...

Like I said, to believe that something doesn't exist is a belief, just as believing that it does exist is a belief. One person believes in option A, and another believes in option B. If you're saying there are no priests or such in atheism, well, in the true Islam of the Quran, there are no clergy either.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
Like I said, to believe that something doesn't exist is a belief, just as believing that it does exist is a belief. One person believes in option A, and another believes in option B. If you're saying there are no priests or such in atheism, well, in the true Islam of the Quran, there are no clergy either.
Click to expand...
Atheism is not a belief that God does not exist.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
Like I said, to believe that something doesn't exist is a belief, just as believing that it does exist is a belief. One person believes in option A, and another believes in option B. If you're saying there are no priests or such in atheism, well, in the true Islam of the Quran, there are no clergy either.
Click to expand...
Atheism is a lack of belief in god's existence. Try again.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
It's a sad truth that across the Star Trek universe—in its films, shows, and comics—teleportation is a guise for murder. Mr. Spock and all the others were unfortunately destroyed the very first time they were beamed up. Everyone we've seen since then are nothing more than replicas.
Click to expand...

Not in the original series. TOS has numerous incidents that demonstrate that a person's "consciousness" can transfer between material bodies, but cannot be duplicated.

In Return to Tomorrow, Kirk's, Spock's, and a crewwoman-of-the-week's consciousnesses are stored in glowing alien spheres while the aliens who had resided in those spheres temporarily takes over their bodies. When Spock's sphere is destroyed Spock is saved by temporarily transferring his consciousness into Nurse Chapel's body, the two of them sharing it. (Spock later repeats this trick with Doctor McCoy in the original-cast movie series.)

In Turnabout Intruder, there's a direct body swap between Kirk and Janice Lester. When this happens we see their respective glowing transparent ghosts moving from one body to the other.

In Mirror, Mirror, a transporter accident sends the main cast into an alternate reality where the Federation is warlike, while also (off camera) sending their mirror universe counterparts to the normal Enterprise. The normal crew arrive in the mirror universe's transporter room wearing the clothes of the mirror universe counterparts, though. Which means the crossing transporter beams either transferred the consciousnesses and bodies but not the clothing, or more likely, transferred just the consciousnesses while keeping all the material substances correctly sorted.

Most telling of all, in The Enemy Within, a transporter accident duplicates Kirk's body. But it doesn't duplicate his consciousness; instead, it splits Kirk's consciousness in two, one "good" but feckless and indecisive, and the other willful and "evil." If the transporter can't duplicate a consciousness, then "it creates a duplicate and kills the original" can't be an accurate description of how it works. Which would also explain why it's never used to create a duplicate on purpose, even in the most dire situations (where, for instance, a willing duplicate might undertake a suicide mission to save everyone while leaving the original alive, or vice versa).

These episodes followed the prevailing ethos of its time, in positing individual souls (all the above examples might as well have used the word "soul" instead of "consciousness") that normally stick to the body wherever it goes, but might sometimes leave it for various reasons and may even get trapped elsewhere under extraordinary circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Emre_1974tr said:
Like I said, to believe that something doesn't exist is a belief, just as believing that it does exist is a belief. One person believes in option A, and another believes in option B. If you're saying there are no priests or such in atheism, well, in the true Islam of the Quran, there are no clergy either.
Click to expand...
Do you believe in fairies?
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
Atheism is a lack of belief in god's existence. Try again.
Click to expand...
The trouble is that theists actually do believe that all the gods other than their own don't exist. For any given god, they either believe it exists, or they believe that it doesn't. They can't comprehend that any other attitude could exist.
 
Emre_1974tr said:
No, atheism is also a religion. To believe that Allah does not exist is a belief.
Click to expand...
No. Failing to accept your religion (and, in fact, any religion) is not itself a religion. There is more to religion than simply having an opinion on whether gods exist.

Emre_1974tr said:
In contrast, knowing that Allah exists is true knowledge.
Click to expand...
Not by any any definition of "knowledge" that can be defended to broad satisfaction.
 
The inability to understand Star Trek was a work of pure fiction concerns me.
None of that happened. Good thing he hasn't read the Hitchhiker's Guide trilogy.
The number of lives required to debunk that would be incredible.

It's no wonder Emre can accept his beliefs as pure truths and attack other equally ridiculous religions as wrong yet somehow worth a lifetime dedicated to denouncing them.

Emre, when is the visionary blind or the wise man actually the fool?
 
Emre_1974tr said:
Mourning corner :(. Mr. Spock, Captain Kirk, Christopher Pike, Captain Picard...and the others... they were all destroyed.
Click to expand...
You're taking all that storytelling pretty seriously.

Emre_1974tr said:
They believed what the foolish scientists and philosophers said and passed on to the afterlife by tearing themselves to pieces in the means of destruction called teleportation. They were good people, they didn't deserve this. They paid a bitter price for believing what the experts told them like sheep.
Click to expand...
Wow, juist dripping with hatred for science and scientists, just like we see from so many religious people. We'd just prefer you take our contribution to modern society (i.e., everything about modern society), say thanks, and go your way. If you dislike science so much, hang up your computer and go back to squatting in the desert tending your goats.

Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was an atheist. No need for him to write fiction about hellfire and brimstone, as he believed such superstitious concepts would have finally been forsaken in the future. Dr. McCoy, for example, dismisses the creation saga as "myth." But as @Myriad points out, the lore is rife with various riffs on mind-body dualism. Quite a lot of celluloid was expended on chasing Spock's soul through space and time. Mind-body dualism does not require a god, or the nose-to-the-carpet practice of religious ritual, or mythical cosmologies. Those are largely orthogonal concepts.

And as @arthwollipot emphasizes, you're just as wrong about Star Trek canon as you are about other fictional canons such as the competing religions you rant against. You demand that we evaluate Islam by taking its various axioms and truth claims as true. Similarly if you're going to criticize the Star Trek canon, you must take all its in-universe claims as true. Otherwise you're engaged in no more productive or valid an exercise than to demand that the Millennium Falcon could outrun the Enterprise because reasons. Imposing Islam on everything including fictional built worlds is unproductive.

The Star Trek transporter does not purport to work by a clone-and-kill mechanism. The actual matter in the original subject is moved to the destination in the form of equivalent energy. In the Next Generation lore we learn that the quantum state of the original is preserved, and that this is sufficient to preserve any model of animism that might exist. That is, the macro-scale concept of dualism gets an appropriate nod.

From all that we can conclude that relativistic quantum mechanics is the proper in-universe framework for evaluating the fanciful claims of teleportation. Islam's cosmology and truth claims are simply irrelevant, as the Trek canon simply ignores it. Your inability to think in worlds outside your religion is a weakness, not a strength, because it deprives you of the ability to evaluate your beliefs critically. In quantum mechanics, the distinction between matter and energy is even more tenuous because matter exists only momentarily according to fluctuations in the quantum fields. A reliable equivalence to energy exists in the form of the relativistic field equations.

Now as soon as we invoke any kind of quantum field theory, the notion of matter permanence writ large goes right out the window. So in a sense, Star Trek's reliance on relativistic quantum dynamics proves your thesis regarding sameness. Or rather, it completely obviates it, since under that axiom nothing is the same from one Planck instant to another. Matter exists in time and space only insofar as the "particle" is observed, and movement is not a continuous behavior but rather the reappearance of the phenomenon of observation from instant to instant at different spacetime coordinates that conforms to macro-scale Newtonian rules. But the rub is that the Star Trek transporter does not materially alter that operation (pun intended). It manipulates the quantum state of the target in a way that obviously is impossible in our current state of the art, but results in a movement (i.e., pattern of successive observation) of the matter insofar as quantum dynamics understands the concepts of matter and movement.

Oh, right. I forgot that Turks invented the transporter. 🤨
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom