>Be in Star Trek>Transporter only copies matter>First time you teleport your soul is gone>If souls exist in the Star Trek universe then nobody who has ever teleported has one>Can do anything you want without religious consequences>Also existence/non-existence of the soul is totally irrelevant because nobody can tell the difference
>>37858865The soul arises from the exact configuration of atoms in your brain, their soul will reawaken in their newly formed exact brain
>>37858895nigga shut the fuck up, no one knows how souls work, no one knows if souls are even a real thing
>>37858901Why are you targetting me specifically when OP also made an assumption about the soul?
>>37858907gotta target someone
Souls don't exist in Star Trek; it's a known fact that all sentient lifeforms were seeded by an originator race millions of years ago; hence why everyone in Star Trek is "human but with weird stuff on their head".
>>37858901Souls have to exist because if everything was purely physical matter, you wouldnt experience the colour red or the softness of boobies.
>>37858901You provide no basis for your premise. There are numerous meditative practices and literary works that elaborate upon the existence of the soul. Your lack of intellectual elaborate would suggest your words are motivated by personal or emotional reasons, so what I have to ask is what happened to you that would provoke such anger at a simple discussion? Using a crass and exaggerated tone does nothing to portray you as someone that can hold up an intellectual conversation.
>>37858895Lol bump you miffed a namefed.
>>37858939Fun fact, Jean-Luc Picard Is canonically a golem, according to trek lore.
>>37858939What bearing does a fictional series have on the real world? Am I supposed to let the perspective of someone else supercede my own?
>>37858865How could the soul, something that isn’t bound/defined by matter, be lost by dematerializing and rematerializing your body using the same matter (exactly what a transporter does)? Most of the cells in your body get replaced as you age, through cell replication, or simply permanently die from the time you are born to the time of your death.Furthermore how could all of the psychics in the show be psychic if they don’t have a soul? You don’t seem to care about Star Trek’s lore, so why does this even matter to you?
>>37858865I watched and loved the voyager show, It was cool to talk about warp engines and galaxy being sliced in quadrants, but it's all fantasy, even the space nasa shills is fake, and It's a dissapointment, how much I would love it to be true..
>>37858901Lets explain it this way.Memories are stored as molecules and can be scanned and (theoretically) reconstructed acordingly. The information is send in lightspeed or faster.
Q is a soul that can completely create and destroy its own material body.Souls are real in the Star Trek universe, and are already detached from the material. They simply follow the signal back to their new matter.
>>37859205We don’t actually know how memories are stored beyond measuring activity between sections of neurons in the brain, or by recording changes in memory/cognition after parts of the brain are removed, so to say that they are “stored as molecules” is unscientific, since we don’t really know how they’re represented in matter, and we don’t actually know how the arrangement of matter that makes up the brain actually leads to consciousness.
>>37859206>Q is a soulThe writers never actually explain what Q is. He could be some kind of quantum AI, or pure consciousness existing in its own dimension as far as anyone can tell. The writers intentionally leave it vague. The only thing that would seem to indicate that he is spiritual in nature is the implication that he can interact with dead people after they have died.
>>37858865Anatta
>>37859050Lmao
>>37858865Souls instantly travel to the other body on quantum principles.
>>37859084what bearing does the real world have on the fictional? in reality the classified projects had ftl vehicles and reversed engineered reproduction models of them nearly 70 years ago.. they had agi this far back as well. the fictional world has not yet caught up to the reality.
>>37858961>the softness of boobies.Come on, you weren't gonna get to experience any of that stuff anyway
the abstract concept of a soul is meaningless until it can be quantified and defined specifically.. and then.. once measured it can be modified, manipulated, enhanced, recorded, and reproduced. in actual fact the 'soul' (depending on the abstract narrative the meaning is drawn from) is an output product similar to a magnetic field.. it is a bosonic field that arises from the atomic structure of the genetic composition of the human. it is related to the strong atomic force and has a bearing on the physical plane that is between its own contained 'consciousness' perspective and that of the outside world containing all other consciousnesses. basically you can't easily break it.. if the genetic substance of the being is still present and intact.. the field it gives rise to is also. so.. worse things are already happening to the 'souls' of humans here on earth than would be caused by the application of such an atomic scale replication technology.. presuming they have resolved down to adequate quality for the technology to be accepted in the first place.
>>37859625https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FRFypcizok
>>37859701
>>37858895I don't know jack shit about quantum mechanics but are all atoms the same? What I mean more specifically is if a Star Trek transporter machine takes apart a person turn them into light and then beams them to a new location would the carbon atoms in your brain, your arm, your left nut etc. be the same ones as before? Does it matter what combination of atoms are used to rebuild (combination) or does the order matter (permutations)? I'm not even asking about a possible soul. I guess I'm trying to ask how percise the reconstruction of the componants of an object has to be to be considered identical to the original
>>37859006Why are you guys so scared to admit that you are nothing more than a configuration of atoms? Everything is.
https://youtu.be/-2g9KVx6jv0?si=EqqwZjeCH4DEHFWaIf I am my memories, why is this woman's memory not yours and everyone else's?The same goes for blood, flesh, neurons, DNA, electricity and even the whole, why this whole and not your whole or the absolute whole?What happens if I split my brain, teleport myself or make a perfect clone? Why do twin brothers have their own point of view?Antta. There is no such thing as an indestructible core or a soul. That's not bad news, it's good news. The Buddha says that if this weren't true, we would truly be condemned, there would be no liberation.
>>37858895This is easily disproved by asking what happens if the new body is formed without destroying the old one.It's even more revealing if you do "the torture test", and ask you to choose before teleporting which copy will undergo horrific torture and then be destroyed.If you truly believe you're teleported into the new copy then you should have no problem saying that your original will receive the torture... It's easy to say you think you're the copy until faced with a choice like that.I bet 99.999% of people will choose to have the copy tortured/destroyed rather than the original, because they know deep down that they're going to walk off the teleported BEING the original.On the other hand if you say you become both then there's no reason not to just flip a coin to decide who gets tortured right? If you're both then it shouldn't matter.But again... If actually faced with this choice you wouldn't leave it up to a coin flip because again deep down you know the idea that you're "both" is total bullshit.You are simply not made of matter. Matter does not determine what you are. You're something beyond matter experiencing an illusion of "being matter".Once you realize that then all these paradoxes just melt away.
>>37859864see >>37860053
>>37858865It gets more fun than that. The transporter essentially vaporizes you but records what you were like down to the smallest subatomic level, then beams that information across space and reassembles "you."What happens if you skip the recreating "you" and just leave you disintegrated? That's murder, right? Does it stop being murder if you get reassembled, say, during the trial?What if you use the recording of the person you disintegrated to make multiple copies? Which one is "real?" The first one you make? Why?If there is a soul, maybe it flies down to the planet when the new body is assembled and makes itself at home... but if you make two or more copies, does it fly to the most recent one? Or does only the first one have a soul?Why does nobody use the transporter as a "life insurance" machine -- make a copy when you are about to go on a dangerous away mission, then if you get killed they can just make a new you current up to the ,moment the copy was made -- it'll be "really you" as much as any other you made by the transporter.
>>37860053>This is easily disproved by asking what happens if the new body is formed without destroying the old one.Can't, you can't record the exact position and velocity of every particle in a person without disrupting them all to Hell. Making a recording at that level is going to kill you.
>>37858895So when Riker got copied, his soul got copied? What happens if they both go to heaven? Do they get re-integrated like time traveling criminals in Enterprise?
>>37858865Data is a robot -- it doesn't have a soul!
>>37859853This might be easy to partially answer if i could find an answer to whether the atoms of the brain are replaced during out lifetime. I know the neurons are not replaced but i think its possible that the atoms in those neurons do. I found others asking the same question but there isnt anyone giving a clear answer
>>37858901while this is true, apply this to everything said on x and it still shines.
>>37859864Because you're a mental tranny. Literally cut your own dick off by reducing yourself to materialism. There's a whole world out there - one both light and dark anon know - and you shut yourself off like a retarded NPC.
>>37860698>The transporter essentially vaporizes you but records what you were like down to the smallest subatomic level, then beams that information across space and reassembles "you."That makes sense as the way to actually develop the technology but that's not how it works in the show, what you described is just fake teleportation using cloning. In the show you remain conscious during the process where you're turned into energy and then beamed over to the destination and then rematerialized from that energy.
>>37861766Thats just really fast movement, its even more fake than the death clone teleport
>>37859050Still has to be the crowning jewel of retarded for new treck
>>37862020>Jean-Luc PicardHURDUR WE ONLY FIGURED OUT MIND TRANSFER 300 YEARS AFTER IT WAS DO ABLE *DROOLS*
>>37858865transporters are a horrible idea, there's 0 need for the original if you can spawn the pattern. You could make a million copies if you can make 1. It's retarded. You wouldn't need the original, just a bunch of stored patterns of "steak" or "screw box" or "person".
>>37860825yes we do
>>37859701>ywn get your testicles smashed like this
>>37858865>If souls exist in the Star Trek universe then nobody who has ever teleported has oneMultiple alien species have had their existence of a soul confirmed in canon (not human souls, though), and teleportation has never been an issue with it.Soul knows where to go, and is not bound by time and space.
>>37863004>Vulcans also believed in the katra, the soul and consciousness of a person, which could be transferred psionically prior to death. (TAS: "Yesteryear"; Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan; Star Trek III: The Search for Spock; TNG: "Gambit, Part I"; ENT: "The Forge", "Awakening") Klingon afterlife has also been canonically confirmed.>In 2376, B'Elanna Torres experienced a near-death experience about her mother Miral almost being sent to Gre'thor because of her daughter's dishonor. However, Torres traded her life for that of her mother, and she herself was sent to Gre'thor, which to her was interpreted as USS Voyager and its crew. (VOY: "Barge of the Dead")This was never explained as vision or hallucination. She went to Hell.
How much of a ship of theseus are current humans? Obviously cells die and get replaced, I've heard brain cells are the only ones retained but really we can't define consciousness well enough to even answer any questions. That being said I'd be a beam truther, I would be one of those shuttle only boomers in the trek universe-it would be obvious that teleportation is a subversive ferengi plot to hoard the latinum and create greater ferenginar on native Klingon and Cardassian lands
>>37860698>to make multiple copies? Which one is "real?" The first one you make? Why?>If there is a soul, maybe it flies down to the planet when the new body is assembled and makes itself at home... but if you make two or more copiesOn several episodes of Star Trek there are transporter accidents that address most of these. Generally people during the transport process are stored inside a "pattern buffer."https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Our_Man_Bashir_(episode)During an episode of Star Trek Deep Space 9, several people had their "patterns" saved in the computer by a last ditch attempt to preserve them before losing power. They are able to "save" the patterns outside of the pattern buffer, but it is explained this takes up so much storage space, they had to wipe the entirety of Deep Space Nine's system storage in order to fit their patterns, from the pattern buffer.From this, it sounds like saving a person's "pattern" out of the pattern buffer has an extremely large file size, so large it's not workable with outside of specifically designed pattern buffers.>"life insurance" machine -- make a copy when you are about to go on a dangerous away mission, then if you get killed they can just make a new you current up to the ,moment the copy was madeBecause your pattern only gets stored when you are dematerialized. There is no storage space suitable for people's patterns, at least Deep Space 9 established this.On TNG there is an episode where Scotty survived in hibernation on a derelict ship, by energizing himself with a transporter beam and keeping his pattern inside the transporter for years by keeping it on some reset loop, to keep it from "degrading" as people typically do when they spend more than a few seconds inside a transporter buffer.https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Relics_(episode)The short answer is, transporting a person requires the transfer of so much data so fast, there aren't computers that can store it so you can't save copies.
>>37858865Uh rightAlso you knowAlien life being present across the galaxy
>>37863070>he thinks Ferengi are the jews of Star Trek and not the Dominion.
>>37863078>there aren't computers that can store it so you can't save copies.But you just gave an example of how you can modify a standard transporter to keep a person's pattern for over 75 years with .003% degradation.It is clearly possible, it just takes research and modification of the design.
>>37863141>copies> keep a person's pattern for over 75 years with .003% degradationAnd it degrades entirely once you energize him once. It generally degrades inside the pattern buffer after a few minutes. Scotty used some weird hack, but he was still only able to store one of himself inside one transporter, and the storage is removed from the buffer once he is energized into one person.Apparently the stream is so fast you can't duplicate it into two separate beings, except when that exactly happened and two Rikers came into existence. The technical limitation seems to be the immense transfer of data, and temporary storage of that data is only possible for a very short time before it degrades.
>>37863288>And it degrades entirely once you energize him once.Only because they arent currently designed to hold it - which is what Scotty modified.This is like saying you cant store a movie on your computer and pointing to streaming services as your proof.>Scotty used some weird hack, but he was still only able to store one of himself inside one transporter, and the storage is removed from the buffer once he is energized into one person.And in all the time after this was known - NO ONE thought to figure out how he did and make a storage machine?This comes from "we needed a plot, but dont think about the tech".It's the same reason no one ever bothered to figure out how transporters can just stop a phaser from firing, can literally de-age people without any affect to their memories, can twin people, can remove parasites and diseases and contaminants.Transporter tech is 100% broken the moment you dig into what they have shown it can do.Imagine one day it was seen that if you tweak a television the right way, you can reach inside and grab the objects. And then no one ever thought that was worth studying ever again.
>>37858865Star Trek is absolutly based and posadist-pilledIt absolutly had major posadist influenceIt is basically fourth internationale posadism the movie.>Humans have a nuclear war in which all capitalist systems are destroyed> Humans learn from their mistakes and rebuilt from the ashes of the old world> Humans get the attention of aliens who initiate first contact>Aliens help to establish a new socialist utopia.We just can't stop winning Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyist-Posadist chads
>>37863320One of the key parts of Star Trek was that Roddenberry envisioned is NOT having nuclear war and surviving into the futureSo clearly you have no fucking clue what you're talking about
>>37858895This was left ambiguous and unanswered on purpose so people would be left wondering, but Polaski abjectly refusing to use the transporters at any cost combined with her in-story renowned recalcitrance for anything the masses think is fine right after the parasitic worms in charge of Starfleet Command were exterminated should be a colossal warning and redpill for people.It might be a franchise targeting nerds and easily impressed sheep, but Roddenberry and his team weren't writing it ignorantly.
>>37863334Bullshit, I saw first contact yesterday and there was a nuclear war.
>>37863342Watch it again cause you're obviously fucking wrong
>>37863342First Contact is post-Roddenbery, but the nuclear cataclysm was always part of Star Trek.You are right.https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III
>>37863352Thanks>>37863346Stop emberassing yourself, kid.
>>37863352Oh shitNope fuck you guysThat's new Star Trek fucking after 2005?Fuck outta here
>>37863361You're a fucking zoomer Nuclear war was never a part of star trek
>>37858915> gotta target someoneBest comeback/thread combo in 4chan history?
>>37859153The main problem is that the writers of today's Trek have no innerstanding whatsoever of the principles Roddenberry was disclosed."Thought is the speed limit" (the episode where they go to the edge of the universe and find the souls of people they thought were dead)"Electromagnetic tools can be used to control your mind by overriding its pilot" (the Stargazer episode)"We seeded the galaxy so there'd be vessels for younger souls to learn to coexist in" (final episode of TNG where it's explicitly mentioned that life's more than atoms)Even the whole Q phenomenon, a collectivist family devoid of individuality (until it doesn't serve the collective, how Soviet of them) that exists interdimensionally with powers evidently not magical, but never explicitly explained as rooted in technological augmentation, suggesting that the Q are purely energetic lifeforms who only manifest in the flesh "beneath them" for the memes.Star Trek was never meant to be philosophical.It's a little like Stargate: here's some facts from the OSS, now let your imagination run wild and make TV with it.
>>37863308>can remove parasites and diseases and contaminants.now that I think about it, they claim they "screen" these out using pattern buffer matches, but how could they have digitized versions of these creatures and be live-CRC checking every molecule being put together in realtime to make sure it's not detecting any parasites or contaminants? Making a phaser non functional is easy, just materialize it without the amount of energy stored in the power cell I guess.All the other stuff is stupid one-off plot points that destroy all consistency with the transporter, but the ability to screen stuff is stupid now that I think about it.Especially when they also in several episodes "check" the transporter log to see how people have changed since their last transport. So the transporter stores logs of every single atom disassembled and reassembled and but it can't recreate them?
>>37863368Wrong.>>37863386>Making a phaser non functional is easy, just materialize it without the amount of energy stored in the power cell I guess.The phaser was in the process of firing when it was transported. It was already releasing the energy and the transporter just...got rid of it.Transporters dont just copy and recreate.They can quite clearly just choose what the subatomic situation is within their given volume of space.They literally are reality warping.
>>37863430Having an episode added in almost 100 years later specifically dealing with time travel and nuclear war doesn't make you right about first contact which was made before then which makesWait for itAbsolutely unquestionably correct
>>37863368Except WW3.It's only briefly mentioned in TNG, more of a thing in Wrath of Khan and Enterprise and that one TNG movie about the first warp drive.It was a nuclear exchange with genetically engineered supersoldiers high on crystal meth doing the fighting.
>>37863463>right about first contactNot the anon that brought up the movie, which I said was post-Roddenberry.Strawman only shows you know you are wrong.WW3 was always part of the canon.
>>37863480Show me the fucking transcriptI don't believe it for a secondAnd everywhere online leads to Picard or fucking whatever Enterprise
>>37863498First episode of TNG, the trial against humanity. Q shows a genetic supersoldier and explicitly mentions nuclear war.
>>37863498>Roddenberry envisioned is NOT having nuclear warAnd of course you will match your own demanded standard by providing this:>One of the key parts of Star Trek was that Roddenberry envisioned is NOT having nuclear war
>>37863521Show me. I honestly don't believe I have ever heard Q say the words nuclear war.
>>37863377I take back what I said about being a good thread. Was hoping for more soul discussion, and got mostly Star Trek discussion. 2/10
>>37863553>Was hoping for more soul discussionAnd yet the post bringing up souls and how they are dealt with in ST was ignored.
As my closing statement I would like to point out that souls are real. Nuclear war was never in Star Trek. And I am, as always, 100% innocent and correct without question.
>>37859864>goyim are just animalsit sounds talmudic.
Souls are canon in Star Trek, as was shown.Nuclear War is canon in Star Trek, as was shown.What was NEVER shown was the claim the Gene Roddenberry specifically denied a nuclear exchange.
>>37863610FalseThe impetus was to prove it was a part of First Contact which was not successfully executed.
>>37863619>The impetus was to prove it was a part of First ContactStrawman.No one ever said the nuclear exchange was a part of first contact.>Humans have a nuclear war in which all capitalist systems are destroyed> Humans learn from their mistakes and rebuilt from the ashes of the old world> Humans get the attention of aliens who initiate first contactNuclear War happens decades before first contact, which everyone knows is initiated from the first utilization of warp tech.You have been fighting a strawman because you know you are wrong.Still waiting for you to cite this:>One of the key parts of Star Trek was that Roddenberry envisioned is NOT having nuclear warAnd now - since you lied about what would be your last post - you have the time to do so.
>>37863642No it didn'tThat is a retcon that happened almost 20 years later by other writers for other shows. You keep going to the timeline on the fucking internet without looking at the source of where these things happened. It's actually kinda hilarious.It was never a part of Star Trek. Never mentioned once in first contact and has nothing to do with it.
>>37863658WW3 has been a part of Star Trek from the very beginning, and I have cited TOS where this is true.You have failed, and repeatedly failed every time, to cite your false claim.Still waiting for you to cite this:>One of the key parts of Star Trek was that Roddenberry envisioned is NOT having nuclear warNo more responses until you give the exact source of this.
>>37863665You haven't cited anything you psychoYour opinions on the thing is not a citation You haven't shown ANY evidence that nuclear war was in TNG or TOS except cause you said soAnd I'm starting to think you might not have soul at all
>>37863541Leave it to a trekbeard to nitpick over whether a cataclysmic world war was nuclear or not, fucking useless pedantic nonsense. btw roddenberry was a loon and TNG got better after he died, prove me wrong(protip: you can't)
>>37863824>Leave it to a trekbeard to nitpick over whether a cataclysmic world war was nuclear or not, fucking useless pedantic nonsense. btw roddenberry was a loon and TNG got better after he died, prove me wrong(protip: you can't)He turned Wesley into a Mary Sue because it was supposed to be his own self-insertion.
>>37862724This is how real medical tech works. If you break your arm, they just beam you up, then beam you back with an unbroken arm. Because the pattern buffer is just data, like a computer uses.
I've never heard God chuckle so much as when I sat and watched Star Trek one night. Data and AI in particular really gets him going.Not larping whatsoever.
>>37858865Imagine pondering the metaphysical implications of complete fiction.
>>37860053That doesn't really disprove anything. You might consider yourself unique and have all these ideas about "you" and survival and still be configuration of atoms.
>>37865475It's just a fancy way of discussing identityShip of Theseus is an old philosophy problem about a ship that is replaced piece by piece and you're asked to figure out if it is still the same shape of every piece is replaced with new parts
I feel like star trek never took itself seriously in a way, but I've been curious to check it out. Is starting at the very beginning just the way to do it?
>>37866293>Is starting at the very beginning just the way to do it?You don't really have to, especially because the original series is very different from the others. Later series even try to do crossovers and they have to come up with some bullshit to explain all the differences.But that's also why I definitely recommend checking it out. It has a feel to it that very few things in the modern age are able to replicate.The first 2 series (original and next gen) are hands down the best.
>>37859280Well, in Star Trek they do
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KadT7N4SbWo
Why delete the original when they could just send the clone?
>>37863498>TNG 1x01: Encounter at Farpoint>0:20:00>Picard: Mid 21st century. The post-atomic horror.I guess that "atomic" part was a gender reveal party that got terribly out of hand
>>37866258>It's just a fancy way of discussing identityIf you want to discuss identity in a baised manner. The ship of Theseus was a discussion about an inanimate object. You are talking about living creatures and the show completely misrepresents science to create a fictional universe that exists mostly to culturally program its viewers into a political ideology (society without money, single motherhood, Federations are good, trust the science, stronk women, multiculturalism, etc.). I don't really care about the politics, but the representation of science in the show does bend toward a political agenda regardless of whether you agree with it or not. In this instance, it's inferred that people are simply atoms to be re-arranged, we can be copied, and we have no souls. The original series went further when they removed all water from the human body in an episode and inferred that we are basically just mineral blocks. When the show wanted to make a different political statement, they had beings of complete energy. I get your point, but discussing fictional "science" that exists mostly as political metaphor as a metaphor itself for the metaphysics of the human soul probably isn't going to work. You are taking the shadows on the wall of our cave too seriously.
souls are a function of the body
>>37858865soul doesn't exist in star trektheir idea is that all gods are aliensits marxist propaganda from head to toe
>>37858901shut the fuck up retard, he's right
>>37869544based and trekpilled, I almost went to rewatch encounter at farpoint to see if they mentioned it. Thank you for sparing me, it's hard enough slogging Goyager
>>37858895Nope you got it reversed, the universe is made out of consciousness and your brain is made out of soul.The teleporting machine is just a mental process like everything else and by moving your body it moves the observation point of your soul that isn't at any physical spacial location.
>>37869544Again I don't know if you know what a citation isBut it's not your fan fiction that you literally wrote yourself
>>37869936And you are some kind of definitive expert on this subject I assume? And we are to believe you because you provide no logic or rationale for your completely shit opinion? The fucking egos, lack of introspection, and complete lack of anything resembling rational thought on /x/ never ceases to amaze me.
>>37869636>souls are a function of the bodyAccording to a science fiction series made in the 1980's. You people are so fucking stupid. Literally unable to separate fiction loosely based on actual science made by a raging globalist faggot in order to program his agenda into your smooth brains.
>>37869615Well think about transexuals and their practice of removing dead namesIn their way of thinking the teleporter makes a new person every timeWhereas other people don't look at it that way that they are the same person they were beforeBut anyone can change their nameAnd then we get into destiny was the ship always gonna be replaced by other stuff? Doesn't that mean its true shape wasn't the first one?But then back to star trek and teleporters which specifically replicate the person down to the moleculeOf all the tech in star trek transporters are the ones we understand the mostThey are powerful God machines capable of curing illnesses just as a consequence of its functionSo in one situation we can say Kirk is a new Kirk Everytime which means we believe that identity is fluid and ever changing, Kirk actually does believe this is the case which is why he hates them so muchOr that it is the same Kirk walking through on the other side which means you believe identity is fixed and any change in our behavior is the result of some disturbance
