I'd rather that I existed and no one know. Even if nobody knew I existed, I would know that I had an impact on the world. Sometimes the biggest and best impacts are the ones that no one ever learns about.
@TheReasonWhyGuy number one is excisting and number two is being fantasy. since evryone know who i am and i have never existed i am made up from an idea. a little like jesus, unless hes real ofc.
well anyway i'll say i would want evryone to know who you are and never have exist.existing forever in itself is painful. but when no one knows u exsist theres no point in exsisting. now is there =P ?
Exist forever. People are going to die, hence they will forget me. So either way people will forget. But at least this way I will always remember. Besides, most people suck and I wouldn't care if they knew me.
And if I die......who the crap cares if they remember me. I'll be dead, so I sure as hell wont give a fuck.
@TheReasonWhyGuy I would choose identity, so we could say, exictence is more important for me than being known by others. Probably that means that I wouldn't add too many things to the common knowledge, wouldn't leave anything behind me but I would experience which is more valuable. And maybe it is strange to declare this but I truly believe the pleasure of life is above everything.
I would rather live forever and be able to do great things even if no one knew about me. And if you are known doesn't it depend on what your known for??
i would like to exist forever as long as i had some meaningful affect? effect? on reality. why would it matter if i were forgotten by things that could never outlive me anyway? i could be godlike! I could manipulate the universe! It could by my computer on which to record my legacy which I would write for myself. And then I would eventually figure out how to kill myself, hopefully to restart the universe? I'm just SOC writing so yeah.
What I mean by existence is the ability to perceptually experience the physicality of the universe however holographic Quantum physicists believe it to be.
I wouldn’t really like to favour any of the questions you posted.
Regardless of whether your ego gets in the way or not it’s important to not deceive yourself of the present , so enjoy that experience & be thankful for it
@theprodigy2186 "and I don't see any value in having people remember me. "
Well, a value some put to it is, that having everyone know "who" you are, would have a far greater impact on the scheme of things, than merely existing. Though some have said that, acting without being known can have that same advantage :|
Most choices are justifiable, but I agree with you, but for me, it's because I want to exist XD
This question is actually about which is valued more, ID or EGO :)
@TheReasonWhyGuy You know what's funny? I'm actually writing a book right now, but I am writing it under a pen name, "Anon E. Moss". If all goes to plan, it is possible that such a book could have a huge impact, and yet... no one would know my name ; )
After the thought required...meaning procrastination of everything else I have to do....I have to say I would rather exist and evereyone forget about me than have everyone know be but not exist.
First, I would want to experience existance just for the sake of experiencing it.
Second: - I negate infamy. People wouldn't use my ideals and ideas for negative reasons, or at least attribute my name to them. (See point below.) - My influence is still there. The good I do, the help I provide, etc, it all matters because it shapes people. Even if I am forgotten, that I helped and shaped others is enough of a reason to for me to exist. [Basically I still live on in what they got from me.]
(impossible to try it, since to be immortal, you must never die, and to be able to make that claim, you must have first lived forever(or else you couldn't know for certain, that you are immortal), thus it's impossible to be immortal :P, it's only a matter of how likely your death is, and by what causes)
"Ask any 110 yr old person. All their friends are dead."
I'm not a very social person, and most of my loved ones left or died, yet I'm still unsure about which I'd like.
It's like the saying, "Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all", which could apply to existing, and why experience is preferred over non-existence.
Like the suffering you get with most love, you also have with life, but that saying is true, it's better to have contrast, than nothing at all
I'm pretty introverted in general so I feel like I lean towards choice A.
The idea that mortality is what makes life meaningful is more poetically beautiful than it is logical to me, and being able to exist forever, watch humanity grow, wander about, and experience everything the world has to offer (without the time limit of death), in my opinion, would be pretty cool.
Out of those two choices, I cannot choose. Neither fits me. Either I exist and am known for what I did or I don't exist and am not known; anything else is dishonest to say the least.
I'm one of those people who is quite happy to do things on my own. So long as I could be doing what I wanted to do, I would have no problem with no-one knowing I existed.
Incidentally, just cos no one is allowed to know I exist does that prohibit me from doing things like posting anonymous comments on the web? So long as I (the source of these thoughts) remain unknown.
Seems rather easy a question to me. Without existence, what good does notoriety do? Can the Easter Bunny or Rocky Balboa know or care how popular they are? I'm not so arrogant as to suggest that my perception is all that exists, even if I can't prove definitively otherwise. Though without an existence to perceive that fame would be moot.
What good is all the praise and cheer lauded by the citizens of Ferelden if I've never played Dragon Age to witness it with a perception that does exist.
So I pick #1, to be famed without existence. Even if it's non-existent to the non-existent, I would rather not exist at all than being forced to suffer the mind-numbing torture of being forced to exist unto infinity. Forever is a long time, and a forever beyond that.
Though perhaps I'd get lucky and the insanity would effectively be the non-existence of who "I" am that made the choice.
Though a life without social contact & bonds would be maddening as well, at least the suffering is finite.
The question is a bit unfair, though. Our minds were "designed" for survival on the Savannah, dodging predators and finding mates and food. We can barely conceive of numbers over 6 without resorting to creating and organizing mental subgroups. Nor can an existent mind understand what it means to be non-existent? We can fumble around at the edges of these concepts, make mental shortcuts of them... but we can't perceive them
Can you really expect anyone to give an honest answer to such questions?
Well, it's not about appreciating your own fame, but rather that you choose to have unlimited impact, by way of culture, yet never enjoying it.
As for our brains being not equipped, well just because we don't waste brain power on actually conceiving of large numbers, and instead our brains do the computationally smart thing, of subdividing groups. I don't think this is beyond our level of contemplation, perhaps beyond our imagination, but certainly not beyond conceptualizing.
@Sinuev1 It's like thinking about higher dimensions, our brains aren't evolved to comprehend what a 4th dimensional hypercube looks like in 4 dimensions, but we can conceive of it's structure, and think about it's behavior. Just because we don't waste brain power on actually perceiving it, doesn't mean we are useless when it's involved :P
Ah, nothing more than curiosity... sometimes just asking a question, helps you know what others are thinking and well, I knew which I'd choose after asking myself the question... it was actually partially derived from an anime, which explored what existence is, but I made the entire question :)
Thanks for the interest, and answering the question... you don't know how many say neither, and how many claim that the question is flawed either because they don't understand, or not want to answer
Thx 4 answering man.i think those who do not want to consider such questions think they will have an easier life .but we know better that it' s not true late late realization!!!!
"It's meant to be hard, and not fun, since it makes the answer more revealing about the person, and what they value :P"
But it's interesting because both options theoretically give you a great deal of power. The power to have your influence known for eternity (your will be done etc.)
and the power to do as you pleased because no-one knows of you so you can never be made to account.
I would deffinatly prefer to exist unknown. Although I would prefer the option to end my existence eg amend it to live as long as you choose unknown to anyone. After all eternity is a very long time.
@TheReasonWhyGuy True, true. It still wouldn't change my choice. To me life is far more valuable than fame especially if the fame requires the life to never have existed.
I'm sure you've answered this somewhere burt which would you choose?
As for not choosing either, that's cheating, since this isn't meant to be an easy answer, and more importantly, they're meant to be lousy, it's to see what you value, and not to make it easy to answer :P
1: The second option is plainly contradictory. Nobody can know who I AM if I never AM. At best, they could only know about a fictional "someone" who in reality is nothing. And how could I know how this someone is portrayed, as hero or devil, & if I don't exist, why would I even care?
2: I don't believe it is possible for God to forget that I exist unless he makes me not exist, so in option 1 I would be with God (to some extent) forever.
Why, well simple, it's based on a flawed, and yet common view of temporal logic, since something within a purely mono-temporal reality can both exist, and never have existed.. how? Well once a time travel like logic is explained, I think it'll make more sense.
Let's suppose I travel back in time and kill my own father, well some claim that would not work, however that's only because of a flawed view of temporal logic.
The common idea is that the person traveling back in time, is somehow bound by their origin, which would destroy them by killing their own father. However, this isn't true, since we don't have souls, all we are is mater, which was caused by an event which happened, but now the recurrence of that event is stopped, thus you never existed, yet you still exist since by traveling back in time, you become disconnected with your origin.
In this example it's even simpler, since instead of you going back in time to stop your own birth, rather something simply stops the event, and thus since you didn't go back in time, you're bound by that causality, and thus cease to be... and the thing which stopped your birth, simultaneously created a "fictional" form of you, and "implanted" it into the minds of everyone.
You forgot that the fiction was derived from you, in a state which you existed, thus the fiction, is of you, since it was made when you existed, and then your existence except for in the fictional form, was removed entirely, from history too.
I'm not entirely sure whether that escapes the contradiction (since I am not sure whether the whole notion of "time-travel" itself is coherent), but I suppose I'll accept that.
I would rather have everyone forget I existed and exist forever.
The reason why is because given the choices, To exist is better than to not exist.
Life doesn't suck- The choices we make causes life to be hard or soft. Even Job had a rough time once. There is much to learn and experience.
The 'Everyone else knowing about me' doesn't even register in my brain, because it's silly to hinge anything on the aknowledgement of a group, much less existance.
hm, to exist forever forgotten, or to stop existing but be remembered by many? I remember an African proverb that goes "A man is not dead until he is forgotten." Sounds very Option B-ey. I'd rather exist only in the minds and memory of the future than actually exist alone.
I choose number 1 because I want to see the future of human civilization, and to learn about the Universe. Just think, if you live forever, you could visit every star in the galaxy, and have time to learn everything.
People say they would become bored of living, but I wouldn't. The Universe (or rather, the Multi-verse) is ALWAYS changing and there's infinite possibilities and things to see and experience.
Their may be pain and suffering to go along with it, but I'd happily endure it.
The first one. Simply because I really don't care what people think or remember. I suppose I am very much indifferent to people remembering me unless they knew me personally, which of course they couldn't if I didn't exist.
What I meant was you could be a teacher! To bad your agnostic though.. Community college is free for me because of grants and loans. Pedanics? Are we really here; 1. God created all. 2. The universe exists 3. Data input and our brain make us aware. Anyway HTBK on the other video is one of my freinds.. Some good points.. Take care and goodnight. ;)
@TheReasonWhyGuy that is a plausible answer! That is what my philosophy teacher said that I mentioned my first question and here you have an answer to his question! Most students had trouble with this. Questions 2 and 3 of mine are from Jostein Gaarder btw.
@all Having read the book Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder about religion and philosophy and having gone to Moraine Valley CC in palos hills il usa I would like to add the following to this disscusion: How do we know that were really here? Who are you? And where does the world come from?..
Ah yes, a variation on the old thought, of "I think therefore I am" which I don't agree with... you don't know that just because you think you think, that you really do... or for that matter, that you really exist in any form... all you can go by, is what your senses tell you... and thus that calls into question religion as well, since it could just be from equally non-existent minds... I only can trust that if reality, and myself is real, that the best way to know it, isn't to assume knowledge
under option 1, you couldn't die, it's a part of why people don't like option 1, and also why this question is hard for some to answer... well... one of the reasons why...
The universe won't last forever though. It's going to vanish some billions (and billions and billions and billions, and then some more) of years from now.
It won't last forever though. Definitely not forever. Not even close to forever :)
i choose first question as to the reason that i know how people are viewed in history, only a handful really care about them and the majority will just put you in a southpark or internt cartoon one day making fun of something dumb you did regardless of what you helped produce to leave behind
i would rather exist forever and not have anyone know that i exist since they would truly know my efforts and contributions to the world rather than my personal being.
also in the same way, the human race(if it doesn't destroy itself) acts in the same way. it will continue to grow and advance but human achievements will be most valued by humans (or itself)
I would choose to exist forever. because If I had never existed, or had stopped existing, then there would be no 'me' to perceive my existence, thus making anything to do with me irrelevant.
The point is, to force someone into choosing one of them... if you choose neither, then you miss the point... kinda like a mouse in a box, with 2 openings... and something in each... yet you essentially just sat in the same spot, instead of participating in the "test"... :P
I have a question for you that is, I think, in somewhat of a similar vein: Would you rather have all the knowledge in the universe but be unable to communicate it or be "blissfully ignorant" but able to communicate your basic feelings? I haven't completely honed that question so forgive me if it's a bit of a false dichotomy.
I doubt if a video is in the works...mostly because i don't have a camera but also because i'm dealing with some really tough family stuff right now and my mind isn't as sharp as it could be. Theoretically. But i will try to refine the question. Thanks!
If everyone thought that Jesus or King Arthur existed, does that mean they couldn't possibly be fictional?
Opinion=/=Reality
"he exists as a social/psychological construct. "
Yes, however existing as a construct, or idea does not mean that the being itself exists. Just like a fictional character existing as a construct, doesn't mean the person existed.
Existence here is about your existence, not a construct
I think you mean that the construct exists, however the second one isn't about the construct not existing, but rather the person the construct was derived from.
ask yourself more questions on the nature of existence.
value is something that can appear and evaporate (as it has recently). Value is a social/economic construct that involves the exchange of energy on a fluctuating faith based system. Value exists in a society and many times is derived from a non-existing physicality...yet it exists nonetheless solely on the basis of faith...faith on the premise that a life must be lived and that survival/reproduction is paramount.
And something you should realize, is that existence isn't as simple as either I exist, or I don't. You have influential existence, and then you have experiential existence.
if truth relied on belief then truth would cease to be true if nobody believed the truth anymore.. so for fun what do you think would happen if someone started believing what used to be true? would it be true again (that would mean believing makes even untrue things true) or would it just stay untrue?.. if it stayed untrue then eventually truth would slowly go away making reality become very strange and then eventually ceasing all together.. but what made truth in the first place if that was so?
Unless you're talking about something else, that's non-sense.
For instance, gravity works a certain way, yet it was once thought that it worked another way, at that time, it was considered to be true, but now it isn't. The truth is, that we never have absolute knowledge, so what we call true, is always approximate, and never exact. So to answer your question, no, belief doesn't make reality, but often reality effects belief.
i know i was just replying to ISinisterI about why truth isnt dependant on belief and for fun i was explaining a bit about how it would logically go if truth did depend on belief.. so what i was saying is that if truth depended on belief then if nobody believed a truth anymore that truth would become untrue (truth being dependant on belief + no one believing = no truth) so thats how something "used to be true" in my last comment:D
lets put it this way youre bound by things just like i am.. i cant fly.. in my understanding its true that no matter how hard i try i wont ever fly so why not accept what seems to have a good chance of being real as reality?
2. because I wouldn't want to exist forever. The more I contemplate the meaning of that, the more it sounds like an adequate definition of hell.
I don't care tha everyone would know who I am (whatever *that* means in this context, since how could they know this if I never existed?) But Number 2 still relieves me of the threat of Number 1.
I would have to pick number 1. I have a daughter and if I didn't exist neither would she. I would rather have her no know I existed just so she could. Esisting forever is not my idea of fun though.
I would exist because, well...why not? Life exists for no reason but to be...I'd obviously have a much different perspective on time and losing people. So..yeah. My answer is #1 because why the fuck not.
Very interesting question. I would say that I would rather exist forever and have everyone forget that I ever existed. Few reasons here. In order for people to forget I ever existed, they would at one point have to know that I existed. Since their lives would only be a spec of time on my scale and they would die anyway, I wouldnt mind in the least, because they would be forgetting me when they die anyway. I think life is about personal experiences. If I didnt exist, Id never have any.
I can certainly agree with that, but plenty of other people have referred to the impact they would have, and how important that is, and what is life without the ability to truly impact the lives of others?
Well, it just depends. Some people can impact others, some cant. The ones who impact people can make it a good thing, or a bad. I'm sure we all can agree that Hitler impacted plenty of people, but I'm also sure most of us wouldn't say that what he did was a good thing. Most people don't have THAT much of an impact on people. And the ones who do aren't needed. They can always be replaced by someone else, without anyone knowing. Things wouldn't be the same, but no one would know.
I just couldn't see a point to never existing with everyone knowing who you are. I could see why someone would pick that answer if they knew it was going to help someone in some way. But let's admit, the majority of people are egotistical, and would want to enjoy their fame. I'm sure some people picked that one, yes, but I'm also sure the majority said they'd rather live forever.
lol... well if you read the comments, you wouldn't have made that comment... a very good portion of the people chose 2... mainly because of not wanting to live forever, but also because of ego :)
This is a rewording of another question, which one of my subscribers told me about. The question really is, ID vs EGO
lol, well, I read some and most people seemed to say that they'd pick 1. Maybe I skipped some, I'm not sure. Aside from the fact of most people realizing how terrible life could be if you live forever, I'd figure that even the ones who would want to be known wouldn't pick that because it'd be useless, you couldn't apply it to anything, you wouldn't get any special perks, and you wouldn't exist and be able to enjoy it. Even if that, just because everyone knows you, doesn't mean they like you.
I'd rather that I existed and no one know. Even if nobody knew I existed, I would know that I had an impact on the world. Sometimes the biggest and best impacts are the ones that no one ever learns about.
HimesInu 6 months ago
I don't care if anyone knew I existed its not the story that's important but the experience and the existence
jfeltes 7 months ago
depends of what reason evryone know me for^^
thuseruseu 9 months ago
@thuseruseu they know you as you are... your merits and faults... anything notable, and memorable.
Not all of your embarrassing moments, or every good deed, but anything that might matter to you, and to others.
TheReasonWhyGuy 9 months ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy number one is excisting and number two is being fantasy. since evryone know who i am and i have never existed i am made up from an idea. a little like jesus, unless hes real ofc.
well anyway i'll say i would want evryone to know who you are and never have exist.existing forever in itself is painful. but when no one knows u exsist theres no point in exsisting. now is there =P ?
thuseruseu 9 months ago
so your asking if i either wana be santa or jesus?
thuseruseu 9 months ago
@thuseruseu No, he's asking if you'd rather be man or god.
HimesInu 6 months ago
@HimesInu a man doesn't exsist forever... yet... thought it's not so far from now^^
thuseruseu 6 months ago
@thuseruseu The basis of this question, regardless if a man lives forever or not, is if you'd rather be man or god.
HimesInu 6 months ago
@HimesInu .... it doesn't add up... wouldn't it be better to ask diffrent then?
thuseruseu 6 months ago
I would pick option one, though with restrictions. Existing forever must be a tiring thing.
xxSilverPhinxx 1 year ago
Exist forever. People are going to die, hence they will forget me. So either way people will forget. But at least this way I will always remember. Besides, most people suck and I wouldn't care if they knew me.
And if I die......who the crap cares if they remember me. I'll be dead, so I sure as hell wont give a fuck.
TheWhiteRabbit1990 1 year ago
@TheWhiteRabbit1990 "So either way people will forget. But at least this way I will always remember"
No, the idea is, that you will be remembered forever, even if you never existed.
It's a choice between fame and identity.
Existence and cultural persistence.
Imagine Santa never existed.
The idea of santa might go on in culture for a long time, now imagine a form of yourself preserved in culture forever.
ID VS EGO
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy I would choose identity, so we could say, exictence is more important for me than being known by others. Probably that means that I wouldn't add too many things to the common knowledge, wouldn't leave anything behind me but I would experience which is more valuable. And maybe it is strange to declare this but I truly believe the pleasure of life is above everything.
penzeseszter 8 months ago
I would rather live forever and be able to do great things even if no one knew about me. And if you are known doesn't it depend on what your known for??
lv2sing103 1 year ago
i would like to exist forever as long as i had some meaningful affect? effect? on reality. why would it matter if i were forgotten by things that could never outlive me anyway? i could be godlike! I could manipulate the universe! It could by my computer on which to record my legacy which I would write for myself. And then I would eventually figure out how to kill myself, hopefully to restart the universe? I'm just SOC writing so yeah.
Melechkibitzer 1 year ago
@Melechkibitzer "And then I would eventually figure out how to kill myself,"
That's not allowed... if you choose existence, then you have to always exist, if you choose to be known, then you must always be known.
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I would rather experience life, but it would be a much easier choice if only a few people knew about me -- more or less like we have now.
I don't know that I'd want to exist forever, certainly not without qualification.
SanityInAnarchy 1 year ago
It all depends on what your definition of exsistance is?? My choice would be to experience life regardless of who knew about me.
paulx78 1 year ago
@paulx78 "It all depends on what your definition of exsistance is"
Existence as in, the ability to experience.
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy
Sorry it’s taken so long to reply.
What I mean by existence is the ability to perceptually experience the physicality of the universe however holographic Quantum physicists believe it to be.
I wouldn’t really like to favour any of the questions you posted.
Regardless of whether your ego gets in the way or not it’s important to not deceive yourself of the present , so enjoy that experience & be thankful for it
:-)
paulx78 1 year ago
That's erroneous question. We've all existed forever.
Carl Sagan said, "We are star stuff" and "a way for the cosmos to know itself."
All the atoms on earth and in our bodies came from supernova that blew up over 5 billion years ago.
We're all walking, talking stardust -- this cosmos become AWAKE and looking back at itself? -- & aren't we intimately connected to it all?
We are existence become AWAKE
Enjoy the dance.
BTW, nothing separates us from others in this grand mystery. Please be kind.
goog2k 1 year ago
I'd rather exist forever than not to exist, because I'm adventurous ; ) and I don't see any value in having people remember me.
theprodigy2186 1 year ago
@theprodigy2186 "and I don't see any value in having people remember me. "
Well, a value some put to it is, that having everyone know "who" you are, would have a far greater impact on the scheme of things, than merely existing. Though some have said that, acting without being known can have that same advantage :|
Most choices are justifiable, but I agree with you, but for me, it's because I want to exist XD
This question is actually about which is valued more, ID or EGO :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy You know what's funny? I'm actually writing a book right now, but I am writing it under a pen name, "Anon E. Moss". If all goes to plan, it is possible that such a book could have a huge impact, and yet... no one would know my name ; )
theprodigy2186 1 year ago
@theprodigy2186 lol... a real world example XD
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
After the thought required...meaning procrastination of everything else I have to do....I have to say I would rather exist and evereyone forget about me than have everyone know be but not exist.
First, I would want to experience existance just for the sake of experiencing it.
[cont...]
onijester56 1 year ago
[...cont]
Second: - I negate infamy. People wouldn't use my ideals and ideas for negative reasons, or at least attribute my name to them. (See point below.) - My influence is still there. The good I do, the help I provide, etc, it all matters because it shapes people. Even if I am forgotten, that I helped and shaped others is enough of a reason to for me to exist. [Basically I still live on in what they got from me.]
onijester56 1 year ago
Immortality sucks, so I'd choose the latter.
sputnikowns 1 year ago
@sputnikowns "Immortality sucks"
How do you know, if you've never tried it XD
(impossible to try it, since to be immortal, you must never die, and to be able to make that claim, you must have first lived forever(or else you couldn't know for certain, that you are immortal), thus it's impossible to be immortal :P, it's only a matter of how likely your death is, and by what causes)
Take care :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy
Ask any 110 yr old person. All their friends are dead. And wouldn't you get bored after the first 1000 years? 1'000'000?
sputnikowns 1 year ago
@sputnikowns
"Ask any 110 yr old person. All their friends are dead."
I'm not a very social person, and most of my loved ones left or died, yet I'm still unsure about which I'd like.
It's like the saying, "Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all", which could apply to existing, and why experience is preferred over non-existence.
Like the suffering you get with most love, you also have with life, but that saying is true, it's better to have contrast, than nothing at all
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I'm pretty introverted in general so I feel like I lean towards choice A.
The idea that mortality is what makes life meaningful is more poetically beautiful than it is logical to me, and being able to exist forever, watch humanity grow, wander about, and experience everything the world has to offer (without the time limit of death), in my opinion, would be pretty cool.
twholland1 1 year ago
@twholland1 Death doesn't make life, but experience does, whether recorded experience, or just personal, doesn't mater :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I would go with existing forever. I don't need fame, and by choosing his i could help everyone and see them smile would be enough.
Calimariyum 1 year ago
you realized i never answered this. do you want a video response or just text?
miglegtr 1 year ago
@miglegtr you didn't?
Hmm... you can do either... :)
Video response might get you some of my subs viewing it :D
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
Well the second one is basically god...
id prefer the second because i can still have fun as long as i exist
Celebhir 1 year ago
@Celebhir As would I, since I care less about what being famous, than I do existing :)
It's about the conflict between ID and EGO :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
Don't really know which I would choose. Probably exist forever because if you never existed, how could people know about you at all?
bloodelfpallie 1 year ago
@bloodelfpallie "how could people know about you at all? "
Think about it like, you're a fictional character :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I would still go with existing forever I think. I am generally solitary as it is :P.
bloodelfpallie 1 year ago
@bloodelfpallie Same here :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
Out of those two choices, I cannot choose. Neither fits me. Either I exist and am known for what I did or I don't exist and am not known; anything else is dishonest to say the least.
onijester56 1 year ago
@onijester56 it's about the choice being hard...
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I'm one of those people who is quite happy to do things on my own. So long as I could be doing what I wanted to do, I would have no problem with no-one knowing I existed.
Incidentally, just cos no one is allowed to know I exist does that prohibit me from doing things like posting anonymous comments on the web? So long as I (the source of these thoughts) remain unknown.
BlueGlowingLight4 2 years ago
@PicklePumpers :)
Exactly :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@PicklePumpers "if I never existed I couldn't even make the decision."
Well, in this case, you make the decision, and in an sorta time travel kind of way, you never existed, even though you made the decision.
"Plus if you existed forever and everyone knew of you"
That isn't one of the choices :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I vote for the first option.
Why?
I dislike option 2 for the fact that it is based on lies (people can't actually know non-existent people)
Altough it must be fun to be god :)
alttab007 2 years ago
Seems rather easy a question to me. Without existence, what good does notoriety do? Can the Easter Bunny or Rocky Balboa know or care how popular they are? I'm not so arrogant as to suggest that my perception is all that exists, even if I can't prove definitively otherwise. Though without an existence to perceive that fame would be moot.
What good is all the praise and cheer lauded by the citizens of Ferelden if I've never played Dragon Age to witness it with a perception that does exist.
Sinuev1 2 years ago
So I pick #1, to be famed without existence. Even if it's non-existent to the non-existent, I would rather not exist at all than being forced to suffer the mind-numbing torture of being forced to exist unto infinity. Forever is a long time, and a forever beyond that.
Though perhaps I'd get lucky and the insanity would effectively be the non-existence of who "I" am that made the choice.
Though a life without social contact & bonds would be maddening as well, at least the suffering is finite.
Sinuev1 2 years ago
The question is a bit unfair, though. Our minds were "designed" for survival on the Savannah, dodging predators and finding mates and food. We can barely conceive of numbers over 6 without resorting to creating and organizing mental subgroups. Nor can an existent mind understand what it means to be non-existent? We can fumble around at the edges of these concepts, make mental shortcuts of them... but we can't perceive them
Can you really expect anyone to give an honest answer to such questions?
Sinuev1 2 years ago
@Sinuev1
#2
Well, it's not about appreciating your own fame, but rather that you choose to have unlimited impact, by way of culture, yet never enjoying it.
As for our brains being not equipped, well just because we don't waste brain power on actually conceiving of large numbers, and instead our brains do the computationally smart thing, of subdividing groups. I don't think this is beyond our level of contemplation, perhaps beyond our imagination, but certainly not beyond conceptualizing.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@Sinuev1 It's like thinking about higher dimensions, our brains aren't evolved to comprehend what a 4th dimensional hypercube looks like in 4 dimensions, but we can conceive of it's structure, and think about it's behavior. Just because we don't waste brain power on actually perceiving it, doesn't mean we are useless when it's involved :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy
And i have a question for you too: why you would ask such a question?
TheDancingSamurai 2 years ago
Ah, nothing more than curiosity... sometimes just asking a question, helps you know what others are thinking and well, I knew which I'd choose after asking myself the question... it was actually partially derived from an anime, which explored what existence is, but I made the entire question :)
Thanks for the interest, and answering the question... you don't know how many say neither, and how many claim that the question is flawed either because they don't understand, or not want to answer
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Thx 4 answering man.i think those who do not want to consider such questions think they will have an easier life .but we know better that it' s not true late late realization!!!!
And just out of curiosity(!!!)which anime?!
TheDancingSamurai 2 years ago
@TheDancingSamurai
Serial experiment lain.... one of my favorite, and not one that most people would like...
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
i think to exist is better than not to exist. to know urself even if it has a dear price is better than not to know urself & have a good life.
good questions though!!!
TheDancingSamurai 2 years ago
lol... if you could have companions, then most people would pick #1 :P
It's meant to be hard, and not fun, since it makes the answer more revealing about the person, and what they value :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
"It's meant to be hard, and not fun, since it makes the answer more revealing about the person, and what they value :P"
But it's interesting because both options theoretically give you a great deal of power. The power to have your influence known for eternity (your will be done etc.)
and the power to do as you pleased because no-one knows of you so you can never be made to account.
BlueGlowingLight4 2 years ago
@BlueGlowingLight4 :)
Yep, it actually boils down to 2 words...
ID vs. EGO
Which is more important, knowing that you exist, or that you live on in what other people know.
If existence is important, that you prefer ID over EGO, and if effect is important, than EGO is more important than ID.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I would deffinatly prefer to exist unknown. Although I would prefer the option to end my existence eg amend it to live as long as you choose unknown to anyone. After all eternity is a very long time.
BlueGlowingLight4 2 years ago
@BlueGlowingLight4 "amend it to live as long as you choose unknown to anyone"
That's too good, since that would likely make most people choose that... :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy True, true. It still wouldn't change my choice. To me life is far more valuable than fame especially if the fame requires the life to never have existed.
I'm sure you've answered this somewhere burt which would you choose?
BlueGlowingLight4 2 years ago
@BlueGlowingLight4 I try to avoid answering my own video like that, but yeah, I've given the same answer as you :)
Some people haven't though, and the reasons why are interesting (thus why I made this video, I'm always interested in the reason why XD)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Option 2... yep, just like jesus XD
As for not choosing either, that's cheating, since this isn't meant to be an easy answer, and more importantly, they're meant to be lousy, it's to see what you value, and not to make it easy to answer :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
i dont need people to know me. as long as i have power over everything, id want to exist forever.
loturos 2 years ago
I would prefer the first option. For 2 reasons.
1: The second option is plainly contradictory. Nobody can know who I AM if I never AM. At best, they could only know about a fictional "someone" who in reality is nothing. And how could I know how this someone is portrayed, as hero or devil, & if I don't exist, why would I even care?
2: I don't believe it is possible for God to forget that I exist unless he makes me not exist, so in option 1 I would be with God (to some extent) forever.
NomosCharis 2 years ago
I agree with everything except this...
" ...is plainly contradictory"
Why, well simple, it's based on a flawed, and yet common view of temporal logic, since something within a purely mono-temporal reality can both exist, and never have existed.. how? Well once a time travel like logic is explained, I think it'll make more sense.
Let's suppose I travel back in time and kill my own father, well some claim that would not work, however that's only because of a flawed view of temporal logic.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
...Continued
The common idea is that the person traveling back in time, is somehow bound by their origin, which would destroy them by killing their own father. However, this isn't true, since we don't have souls, all we are is mater, which was caused by an event which happened, but now the recurrence of that event is stopped, thus you never existed, yet you still exist since by traveling back in time, you become disconnected with your origin.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
In this example it's even simpler, since instead of you going back in time to stop your own birth, rather something simply stops the event, and thus since you didn't go back in time, you're bound by that causality, and thus cease to be... and the thing which stopped your birth, simultaneously created a "fictional" form of you, and "implanted" it into the minds of everyone.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Even in this case, what everybody "knows" is not "who I am," since, in this scenario, "I am not."
:)
So I still think it's a contradictory scenario, since what they know is not "who I am," but a fiction.
NomosCharis 2 years ago
You forgot that the fiction was derived from you, in a state which you existed, thus the fiction, is of you, since it was made when you existed, and then your existence except for in the fictional form, was removed entirely, from history too.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Ok.
I'm not entirely sure whether that escapes the contradiction (since I am not sure whether the whole notion of "time-travel" itself is coherent), but I suppose I'll accept that.
...I'd still prefer option 2.
:)
NomosCharis 2 years ago
"not sure whether the whole notion of "time-travel" itself is coherent)"
Well, it's based on which temporal model the universe follows... it could be quite simple, or complex, or simply impossible :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
oops.
I meant I would still prefer option 1. Not option 2.
:)
NomosCharis 2 years ago
I would rather have everyone forget I existed and exist forever.
The reason why is because given the choices, To exist is better than to not exist.
Life doesn't suck- The choices we make causes life to be hard or soft. Even Job had a rough time once. There is much to learn and experience.
The 'Everyone else knowing about me' doesn't even register in my brain, because it's silly to hinge anything on the aknowledgement of a group, much less existance.
EighteenCharacters 2 years ago
Yep :)
This is a question of value.... which is more important, ID, or EGO.
#2 is a sign of EGO, while #1 is about ID
I would also choose 1 btw :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
hm, to exist forever forgotten, or to stop existing but be remembered by many? I remember an African proverb that goes "A man is not dead until he is forgotten." Sounds very Option B-ey. I'd rather exist only in the minds and memory of the future than actually exist alone.
SeaScrabbler 2 years ago
I choose number 1 because I want to see the future of human civilization, and to learn about the Universe. Just think, if you live forever, you could visit every star in the galaxy, and have time to learn everything.
People say they would become bored of living, but I wouldn't. The Universe (or rather, the Multi-verse) is ALWAYS changing and there's infinite possibilities and things to see and experience.
Their may be pain and suffering to go along with it, but I'd happily endure it.
JokinJoe 2 years ago
Ugh, I hate that they're no way to edit a post. I used "their" instead of "there" XD
JokinJoe 2 years ago
UGHHHH! Again I did it! Whatever.
JokinJoe 2 years ago
@JokinJoe
That's because you're young. Eventually you'll grow tired of outliving everyone you loved. Eternity alone is a living hell for a social species.
Nerusai 2 years ago
The first one. Simply because I really don't care what people think or remember. I suppose I am very much indifferent to people remembering me unless they knew me personally, which of course they couldn't if I didn't exist.
sonnygll 2 years ago
What I meant was you could be a teacher! To bad your agnostic though.. Community college is free for me because of grants and loans. Pedanics? Are we really here; 1. God created all. 2. The universe exists 3. Data input and our brain make us aware. Anyway HTBK on the other video is one of my freinds.. Some good points.. Take care and goodnight. ;)
TheForthcoming1 2 years ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy that is a plausible answer! That is what my philosophy teacher said that I mentioned my first question and here you have an answer to his question! Most students had trouble with this. Questions 2 and 3 of mine are from Jostein Gaarder btw.
TheForthcoming1 2 years ago
You make me want to cry... T.T
You should tell me I'm an idiot, so I won't feel capable of doing well in college, since I can't afford it... :(
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@all Having read the book Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder about religion and philosophy and having gone to Moraine Valley CC in palos hills il usa I would like to add the following to this disscusion: How do we know that were really here? Who are you? And where does the world come from?..
TheForthcoming1 2 years ago
Ah yes, a variation on the old thought, of "I think therefore I am" which I don't agree with... you don't know that just because you think you think, that you really do... or for that matter, that you really exist in any form... all you can go by, is what your senses tell you... and thus that calls into question religion as well, since it could just be from equally non-existent minds... I only can trust that if reality, and myself is real, that the best way to know it, isn't to assume knowledge
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
One word: Epistemology.
God's been dead quite a while now, but people keep gathering around the body in some strange necrophilic orgy.
I believe we put him to rest somewhere near solipsism.
Meanwhile we have quite excellent answers to where the world came from, who we are etc. etc. evidence-based as well.
Nerusai 2 years ago
It's a no-brainer. #1. I have limitless ability to entertain myself.
sevenahm 2 years ago
I would prefer the first option as I am very attracted to the idea of nobody knowing of me. I enjoy observing without interacting already.
Regarding existing forever, I would not care. I would still die!
Ayauchi 2 years ago
under option 1, you couldn't die, it's a part of why people don't like option 1, and also why this question is hard for some to answer... well... one of the reasons why...
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
o_o
Everybody is just parts of the universe so everybody exists forever anyway.
However, if option 1 prevents death then I think I would have to flip a coin or something. They both sound good to me.
Probably still 1 because I haven't got the best ending in Metroid yet.
Ayauchi 2 years ago
lol
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
The universe won't last forever though. It's going to vanish some billions (and billions and billions and billions, and then some more) of years from now.
It won't last forever though. Definitely not forever. Not even close to forever :)
Nerusai 2 years ago
Option 2 is paradoxical though, if you never existed, you couldn't have picked it.
Nerusai 2 years ago
That's your English.
ie9rws 2 years ago
oh, I forgot to add the word that, before you ^=^
Sorry, but it sounded fine to me, which likely that I likely have terrible English -.-
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
everyone forgets
no one, everyone , anyone, anybody, someone , somebody , + sigular
everyone knows
everyone goes
Do you prefer everyone to do .... .?
I would rather do than .........
Would you rather +verb +Object ?
Would you rather forget that you ever existed , everyone? is fine.
ie9rws 2 years ago
@_@
Poetry, or a very poorly written comment... idk which XD
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
i choose first question as to the reason that i know how people are viewed in history, only a handful really care about them and the majority will just put you in a southpark or internt cartoon one day making fun of something dumb you did regardless of what you helped produce to leave behind
kristophershaun 2 years ago
2.
I would never want to live forever.
That would bore me to death. lol ^^)
panthera50 2 years ago
existing forever with that kind of loneliness would make you wish you had never existed.. i would rather never exist than wish for it later
chunktuff 2 years ago
i would rather exist forever and not have anyone know that i exist since they would truly know my efforts and contributions to the world rather than my personal being.
also in the same way, the human race(if it doesn't destroy itself) acts in the same way. it will continue to grow and advance but human achievements will be most valued by humans (or itself)
also it'd be great for tax evasion...jk
iwalkal0ne 2 years ago
lol...money would definitely stop meaning anything to you... :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
10 stars for the most epic question ever.
For me it's an easy one. Choice 1. Because I have something akin to an anti-ego. Even while I exist, I prefer nobody know I'm here.
And because I love watching other people. I'm more interested in them than me. I would love to watch them for eternity.
Geodge 2 years ago 2
existence* Has everyone know who you are? * have existed * You may like to correct your subtitle and English itself.
ie9rws 2 years ago
"Has everyone know who you are?"
I said "have"...
or have everyone know who you are, and yet never have existed...
What correction is needed?
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Existence. Not existance.
I suffer this malady. I'm not a fantabulous speller myself, but the spelling errors I do discern (even my own) shout and haunt me like ghosts.
Geodge 2 years ago
I would rather never exist and have everyone know who I am
Cause then, I would be god :)
Evnaaa 2 years ago
I would choose to exist forever. because If I had never existed, or had stopped existing, then there would be no 'me' to perceive my existence, thus making anything to do with me irrelevant.
RuskePerson 2 years ago
i'd choose the middle.o.O
graceCup 2 years ago
The point is, to force someone into choosing one of them... if you choose neither, then you miss the point... kinda like a mouse in a box, with 2 openings... and something in each... yet you essentially just sat in the same spot, instead of participating in the "test"... :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I have a question for you that is, I think, in somewhat of a similar vein: Would you rather have all the knowledge in the universe but be unable to communicate it or be "blissfully ignorant" but able to communicate your basic feelings? I haven't completely honed that question so forgive me if it's a bit of a false dichotomy.
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
GOOD :D
BTW, it's not a false dichotomy, since it's not arguing for something. Instead, it's a question designed to make people think.
Refine it a bit, but it's pretty good :)
Are you gonna make a video asking that, and post it as a response ;D
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I doubt if a video is in the works...mostly because i don't have a camera but also because i'm dealing with some really tough family stuff right now and my mind isn't as sharp as it could be. Theoretically. But i will try to refine the question. Thanks!
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
I'm sorry to hear about the family stuffs :(
But, you don't need a camera, just look at this video... also, it wouldn't take that much effort :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Really? because I don't know the first thing about making videos. It's probably something I'd really enjoy.
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
This video consists of 9 images, which I faded between... all I did then was record my voice, and match the videos picture fades, to my speaking :)
BTW, you probably would enjoy it :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I actually majored in computer animation way back when...I've let a lot tof time and tech slip by.
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
I'm sure you're more tallented than most morons who post videos on youtube... (like myself)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
If you were a moron then intelligent people like myself (ahem) wouldn't love your videos so much.
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
You're right -.-
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
the second is a self defeating question.
by the shear definition of existence...if society thinks you exist then you exist.
for example; god exists for atheists. he exists as a social/psychological construct.
we are social beings so anything communicated exists in one form of another.
depending on your definition of existence all relayed information exists.
ISinisterI 2 years ago
"if society thinks you exist then you exist."
FAIL, popular opinion does not=reality.
If everyone thought that Jesus or King Arthur existed, does that mean they couldn't possibly be fictional?
Opinion=/=Reality
"he exists as a social/psychological construct. "
Yes, however existing as a construct, or idea does not mean that the being itself exists. Just like a fictional character existing as a construct, doesn't mean the person existed.
Existence here is about your existence, not a construct
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I think you mean that the construct exists, however the second one isn't about the construct not existing, but rather the person the construct was derived from.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
ask yourself more questions on the nature of existence.
value is something that can appear and evaporate (as it has recently). Value is a social/economic construct that involves the exchange of energy on a fluctuating faith based system. Value exists in a society and many times is derived from a non-existing physicality...yet it exists nonetheless solely on the basis of faith...faith on the premise that a life must be lived and that survival/reproduction is paramount.
ISinisterI 2 years ago
anything that can be discussed through a medium exists for the internalist.
and we arrive at an 'epistemological gridlock'
ISinisterI 2 years ago
And something you should realize, is that existence isn't as simple as either I exist, or I don't. You have influential existence, and then you have experiential existence.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
does the existence of truth require belief?
ISinisterI 2 years ago
If only. Whatever society thinks has absolutely no bearing on the objective reality, as it exists independently of human experience.
You can't wish things into existence.
Nerusai 2 years ago
right...you can't wish them into existence but you can talk them into existence.
ISinisterI 2 years ago
Wrong, if I talk about a universe making gun enough... does that suddenly make it a possibility?
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
does the existence of truth require belief?
ISinisterI 2 years ago
Truth isn't reliant on belief...
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
if truth relied on belief then truth would cease to be true if nobody believed the truth anymore.. so for fun what do you think would happen if someone started believing what used to be true? would it be true again (that would mean believing makes even untrue things true) or would it just stay untrue?.. if it stayed untrue then eventually truth would slowly go away making reality become very strange and then eventually ceasing all together.. but what made truth in the first place if that was so?
chunktuff 2 years ago
"what used to be true?"
Unless you're talking about something else, that's non-sense.
For instance, gravity works a certain way, yet it was once thought that it worked another way, at that time, it was considered to be true, but now it isn't. The truth is, that we never have absolute knowledge, so what we call true, is always approximate, and never exact. So to answer your question, no, belief doesn't make reality, but often reality effects belief.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
i know i was just replying to ISinisterI about why truth isnt dependant on belief and for fun i was explaining a bit about how it would logically go if truth did depend on belief.. so what i was saying is that if truth depended on belief then if nobody believed a truth anymore that truth would become untrue (truth being dependant on belief + no one believing = no truth) so thats how something "used to be true" in my last comment:D
chunktuff 2 years ago
ah... oops ^=^
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
lol its all good:D
chunktuff 2 years ago
how can truth exist if it does not exist within a belief?
if no one believes in the truth then the truth is no longer existing.
ISinisterI 2 years ago
there are no answers to epistemological questions...most of our preceptions of realism are governed by taste.
ISinisterI 2 years ago
lets put it this way youre bound by things just like i am.. i cant fly.. in my understanding its true that no matter how hard i try i wont ever fly so why not accept what seems to have a good chance of being real as reality?
chunktuff 2 years ago
well i dont know why you would think so but if truth needed belief to be true then god must believe in the truths that we dont
chunktuff 2 years ago
2. because I wouldn't want to exist forever. The more I contemplate the meaning of that, the more it sounds like an adequate definition of hell.
I don't care tha everyone would know who I am (whatever *that* means in this context, since how could they know this if I never existed?) But Number 2 still relieves me of the threat of Number 1.
AncientAtheist 2 years ago
"(whatever *that* means in this context, since how could they know this if I never existed?)"
Like fictional jesus, everyone knows him, even if he never existed :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
In that case, call me fictional AA and hang my allegorical ass on cross! Just don't give me any of that "forever and ever" shit!
AncientAtheist 2 years ago
ROFL XD
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Ooh nice video. Captions AND 720p! Good job.
Abengoshis 2 years ago
I would have to pick number 1. I have a daughter and if I didn't exist neither would she. I would rather have her no know I existed just so she could. Esisting forever is not my idea of fun though.
kelliko70 2 years ago
Hahaha closed captions on your video with captions already on.
metalorg 2 years ago
wow that is a great question. one which i probably have to think aboiut
miglegtr 2 years ago
Well I hope you find an answer :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
i will answer it. :D i will think about it my next two hours of class
miglegtr 2 years ago
I would exist because, well...why not? Life exists for no reason but to be...I'd obviously have a much different perspective on time and losing people. So..yeah. My answer is #1 because why the fuck not.
FractalHelix777 2 years ago
fuck yeah 720p!
oh my, 200+ comments.
5amGordon 2 years ago
Very interesting question. I would say that I would rather exist forever and have everyone forget that I ever existed. Few reasons here. In order for people to forget I ever existed, they would at one point have to know that I existed. Since their lives would only be a spec of time on my scale and they would die anyway, I wouldnt mind in the least, because they would be forgetting me when they die anyway. I think life is about personal experiences. If I didnt exist, Id never have any.
iDeist 2 years ago
I can certainly agree with that, but plenty of other people have referred to the impact they would have, and how important that is, and what is life without the ability to truly impact the lives of others?
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
what is they were remembered forever as an a-hole hahaha ;]
iDeist 2 years ago
lol... well then, at least history captured the "real" them... even if they never really existed ;]
#49 - Most Discussed (This Week) - Education
WOOT
Thanks guys :D
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Congrats!!!
iDeist 2 years ago
Well, it just depends. Some people can impact others, some cant. The ones who impact people can make it a good thing, or a bad. I'm sure we all can agree that Hitler impacted plenty of people, but I'm also sure most of us wouldn't say that what he did was a good thing. Most people don't have THAT much of an impact on people. And the ones who do aren't needed. They can always be replaced by someone else, without anyone knowing. Things wouldn't be the same, but no one would know.
killingthemslowly 2 years ago
Well, the key is, that this question promises that you'll have the impact you desire, and the "glory", if you choose to never have existed.
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
I just couldn't see a point to never existing with everyone knowing who you are. I could see why someone would pick that answer if they knew it was going to help someone in some way. But let's admit, the majority of people are egotistical, and would want to enjoy their fame. I'm sure some people picked that one, yes, but I'm also sure the majority said they'd rather live forever.
killingthemslowly 2 years ago
lol... well if you read the comments, you wouldn't have made that comment... a very good portion of the people chose 2... mainly because of not wanting to live forever, but also because of ego :)
This is a rewording of another question, which one of my subscribers told me about. The question really is, ID vs EGO
For me, ID is more important... :)
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
lol, well, I read some and most people seemed to say that they'd pick 1. Maybe I skipped some, I'm not sure. Aside from the fact of most people realizing how terrible life could be if you live forever, I'd figure that even the ones who would want to be known wouldn't pick that because it'd be useless, you couldn't apply it to anything, you wouldn't get any special perks, and you wouldn't exist and be able to enjoy it. Even if that, just because everyone knows you, doesn't mean they like you.
killingthemslowly 2 years ago