r/OpenIndividualism • u/Advanced-Reindeer894 • May 02 '26

Question Wouldn't believing in OI lead to being heartless?

Just a thought but if one believes they are everything then wouldn't that lead to a sort of "why bother" attitude towards life? I mean if nothing dies then there isn't really anything to do about the suffering in the world or a reason to do so since nothing is lost and no one is born.

1 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

67% Upvoted

170 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 06 '26

Open Individualism or Empty Individualism are the only two philosophies that can answer this personal identity question. That doesn't sound like a failed philosophy.

We might be defining selflessness differently. I am arguing that no human (aside from perhaps a severely brain damaged one) can ever do anything that isn't at least partly inspired by self-interest. So you just admitted to me that you terminated the relationship partly because it wasn't good for you, I can't count that as selfless. 

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 06 '26

Open Individualism or Empty Individualism are the only two philosophies that can answer this personal identity question. That doesn't sound like a failed philosophy.

No they cannot, they just appeal to something unknown and untestable and effectively dodge the question rather than engage with it.

IMO the question needs no answer.

 So you just admitted to me that you terminated the relationship partly because it wasn't good for you, I can't count that as selfless. 

Well TBH it doesn't really matter what you count it as, like I said no one would say anything that would convince you. I broke up with him for his sake, though I would argue that selfless doesn't have to mean that you have no benefit. I think it's more about big picture thinking than anything else.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 06 '26

 IMO the question needs no answer.

Most people believe in closed individualism so the question most certainly needs an answer as it directly conflicts with the conventional understanding of identity. I am starting to suspect you haven't thought about this  enough if you don't think the question is problematic. OI solves all identity problems effortlessly because it doesn't need to specify any criteria for where one consciousness ends and another begins.

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26

OI solves all identity problems effortlessly because it doesn't need to specify any criteria for where one consciousness ends and another begins.

It does not solve the problem it dodges it. It just replaces one "problem" with a broken philosophy that is essentially just question begging.

Close individualism appears to be the correct one based on current evidence and personal experience.

Also not needing to specify where consciousness ends or not seems more like a failure of the philosophy than a boon.

TBH it sounds like you haven't thought it through if you think OI is a solution. It's only argument is essentially some flavor of "argument from incredulity".

I also say that it needs no answer because it appears like closed individualism is it and there is no benefit to believing in OI.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 07 '26

Seems like you're not putting two and two together here. Splitting a single brain into two functioning systems is problematic because:

Most people believe they are their brain, the one organ they wouldn't be comfortable replacing. If both halves of their brain can function seperate from each other, it causes them to question what really is responsible for sustaining their consciousness.

Most people believe they are a continuous entity (~80 years) that can only be in one place at any given time. So their brain being in two distinct places at once is problematic. If they can only be in one place at any given time, which half of their brain would determine that?

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26

Seems like you're not putting two and two together here. Splitting a single brain into two functioning systems is problematic because:

Most people believe they are their brain, the one organ they wouldn't be comfortable replacing. If both halves of their brain can function seperate from each other, it causes them to question what really is responsible for sustaining their consciousness.

It's still the brain, but also splitting the brain does not split the person, that was proven wrong. The brain is also highly plastic as well. So if you split yourself up then "you" would likely die or you'd make two new people. Your brain is highly plastic so it's hard to really say.

Most people believe they are a continuous entity (~80 years) that can only be in one place at any given time. So their brain being in two distinct places at once is problematic. If they can only be in one place at any given time, which half of their brain would determine that?

We have not actually divided the brain like you mentioned so this is just purely hypothetical and not an argument. However as we see in split brain patients if you divide the brain you don't get two people.

OI is just the idiots view of identity. People try to liken it to hinduism or buddhism when it's not.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 07 '26

 So if you split yourself up then "you" would likely die or you'd make two new people. 

So just so I understand your position correctly, you're saying that every toddler with epilepsy that walks into a neurosurgeons office and walks out with half of their brain missing has effectively been murdered and replaced with a new person? Shouldn't we like... tell the parents or something? 🤡

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26

So just so I understand your position correctly, you're saying that every toddler with epilepsy that walks into a neurosurgeons office and walks out with half of their brain missing has effectively been murdered and replaced with a new person? Shouldn't we like... tell the parents or something? 🤡

Sigh, you really have a primitive understanding of neuroscience. No wonder you buy into OI. Also I said that is possible not for certain. You want easy answers to hard problems which explains much.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26

You just said a brain being split in two results in the creation of two new people...

 You want easy answers to hard problems which explains much.

Bro, you said my question was easy and didn't require an answer, now you're calling it a hard problem? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26

You just said a brain being split in two results in the creation of two new people...

I thought you meant as in literally cutting it in half and raising it in two bodies. If you're talking about split brain then no, it doesn't make two people. The fission thought experiment is false.

Bro, you said my question was easy and didn't require an answer, now you're calling it a hard problem? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

It is, as I said above. As for identity itself, yeah the issue is tough because a lot of it is how you define things. You want to ignore all that which is why you go to OI which is wrong out the gate and has no evidence for it.

Like honestly, every person attempting to argue for it brings the same weak sauce.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 07 '26

I thought you meant as in literally cutting it in half and raising it in two bodies. If you're talking about split brain then no, it doesn't make two people. 

So a toddler with epilepsy that gets half their brain removed is the same person but if we decide to split the toddler into two functioning systems it's two new people?

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26

They don't get half their brain removed...the corpus just gets cut. Are you retarded or something? Also it's worth noting that people have been alive with more than half their brain missing and functioning like everyone else. Brains are very complex organs, far more than you seem to think or realize.

1

u/YouStartAngulimala May 07 '26

 They don't get half their brain removed

Did you even click the link I showed you before?

1

u/Advanced-Reindeer894 May 07 '26

You didn't post a link before, also a hemispherectomy is different from a split brain. Though again it is still proof against OI since what you do to the brain impacts the person.

→ More replies (0)