This shows that inference “I think therefore I exist” is, in general, invalid. You can’t update on your own existence (although you can use more specific info as parameters in your strategy).
Rather, you should look at yourself as an implication: “If I exist in this situation, then my actions are as I now decide”.
This might be a dumb question, but couldn’t the inference of your existence be valid AND bring with it the implication that your actions are as you decide?
After all, if you begin thinking of yourself as an inference, and you think to yourself, “Well, now, IF I exist, THEN yadda yadda...”—I mean, Don’t you exist at that point?
If non-existence is a negative, then you must be existant if you’re thinking anything at all. A decision cannot be made by nothing, right?
If Omega is making you an offer, Omega is validating your existence. Why would Omega, or anyone ask a question and expect a reply from something that doesn’t exist? You can also prove to yourself you exist as you consider the offer because you are engaged in a thinking process.
It feels more natural to say “I think, therefore I exist, and my actions are as I now decide.”
That said, I don’t think anyone can decide themselves out of existence LoL. As far as we know, energy is the only positive in the universe, and it cannot be destroyed, only transformed. So if your conciousness is tied to the structure of the matter you are comprised of, which is a form of energy, which is a positive, then it cannot become a negative, it can only transform into something else.
Maybe the whole “quantum observer” thing can explain why you DO die/disappear: Because if Omega gave you a choice, and you chose to no longer exist, Omega is “forced”, if you will, to observe your decision to cease existence. It’s part of the integrity of reality, I guess—existence usually implies free will AND it implies that you are a constant observer of the universe. If everything in the universe is made of the same thing you are, then everything else should also have the same qualities as you.
Every other positive thing has free will and is a constant observer. With this level playing field, you really have no choice but to accept your observations of the decisions that others make, and likewise others have no choice but to accept whatever decisions you make when they observe you.
So as the reality of your decision is accepted by Omega—Omega perceives you as gone for good. And so does anyone else who was observing. But somehow you’re still around LoL
Maybe that explains ghosts??? lol ;-D I know that sounds all woo-woo but the main point is this: it’s very hard to say that you can choose non-existence if you are a positive, because so far as we know, you can’t undo a positive.
(It reminds me of something Ayn Rand said that made me raise an eyebrow at the whole Objectivism thing: She said you can’t prove a negative and you can’t disprove a positive. I always thought it was the other way around: You can’t disprove a negative (you can’t destroy something that doesn’t exist), and you can’t prove a positive (it’s fallacious to attempt to prove the existence of an absolute, because the existence of an absolute is not up for debate!).
Ayn Rand’s statements were correct without being “true” somehow. You can’t prove a negative because if you could it would be a positive. Where as you can’t disprove a negative because if you COULD disprove a negative you would just end up with a double-negative?? Whaaat???
LOL Whatever, don’t listen to me : D
mmm to clarify that last point a little bit:
If disproving a negative was possible (meaning that disproving a negative could turn it into a positive) that would be the same as creating something out of nothing. It still violates the Law of Conservation of Energy, because the law states that you cannot create energy (can’t turn a negative into a positive)
<3