How Far Would You Go?

[PsychoSarah]

Theoretical situation: you are approached by some supernatural being (could be an angel, demon, spirit, whatever). They offer you the complete knowledge of what happens after death, but you must answer a question honestly: how far would you go to get this knowledge?

The rules:

1. By the premise, assume that this being will be completely honest should you answer the question honestly.

2. Whether or not you will be obligated to perform said action in order to get the answer will remain unknown, you might, and you might not.

3. This isn't a test of faith, you refuse to answer, and the being disappears.

4. You can't say you would die for it yourself, the point is that you live long enough to inform others. After all, it would be a tad redundant to be willing to kill yourself for the knowledge of what happens after we die.

5. You have to actually be physically able to complete the action. No bringing people back to life or starting the end of the world. It has to be within your own limits.

6. You can't assume an answer, it could very well be that the answer is there is no afterlife. The only assumption you can make is that the answer will be honest and accurate.

7. The answer in and of itself will not impact your personal afterlife.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'd ask nicely.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I'd ask nicely.

-_- really? Inventors risk their bodies for inventions they aren't even sure will work, and the most you would be willing to do to get one of the great mysteries of life answered is ask of the answer nicely?

 

[jacks]

I'd never eat avocados again! And I love avocados. I could still have guacamole however.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I'd never eat avocados again! And I love avocados. I could still have guacamole however.

This is the answer to one of the biggest mysteries of all time, not Lent

 

[Paradoxum]

Interesting question.

Firstly, while I see how this is a meaningful question, I don't care that much. I'm fairly happy with my own answer, and I'm fairly happy to be left in uncertainty.

I'd... walk to China, perhaps train to go to the North Pole, maybe I would eat a number of insects. I don't know... there are various was to test commitment. I might do more.

The problem is that if the answer is just that there is nothing (as I suspect), then it seems rather pointless to be told something I already suspect to be true. It would be more significant to me that spirits/ aliens exist.

Perhaps I could tell people, but who would believe me that I know the truth about these things?

If I knew that the majority of the world would believe me, then I'd go further. So is there any reason people would believe me? If it were for the good of the world, I might go through more than for myself.

 

[jacks]

This is the answer to one of the biggest mysteries of all time, not Lent

Now that's funny! I deserved that.

 

[Ana the Ist]

-_- really? Inventors risk their bodies for inventions they aren't even sure will work, and the most you would be willing to do to get one of the great mysteries of life answered is ask of the answer nicely?

Yea...I'm not really concerned lol. I guess I'd pay up to 100$ but I'd still try to haggle him down. I wouldn't really make a sacrifice of anything valuable or important though.

It isn't what I'd consider valuable knowledge.

 

[durangodawood]

Theoretical situation: you are approached by some supernatural being (could be an angel, demon, spirit, whatever). They offer you the complete knowledge of what happens after death, but you must answer a question honestly: how far would you go to get this knowledge?

I'd go about 20% of the way.

 

[variant]

-_- really? Inventors risk their bodies for inventions they aren't even sure will work, and the most you would be willing to do to get one of the great mysteries of life answered is ask of the answer nicely?

The question is what this being really wants from me and whether I can trust it (you stipulate this but in a real world situation it isn't assumable).

If it doesn't want to freely demonstrate knowledge than I am not interested.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The question is what this being really wants from me and whether I can trust it (you stipulate this but in a real world situation it isn't assumable).

If it doesn't want to freely demonstrate knowledge than I am not interested.

The point is that you don't know. For all you know all you need to do is answer the question honestly. Or in order to get the answer you have to prove that you are willing to commit to that statement by performing said action, you just don't know.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I can't believe you guys are so stingy about this.

I'd cut my own dominant arm off with a rusty, dull knife, fry it up, and eat it for the answer.

 

[variant]

The point is that you don't know. For all you know all you need to do is answer the question honestly. Or in order to get the answer you have to prove that you are willing to commit to that statement by performing said action, you just don't know.

If it wants something from me it should ask and we would deal with one another.

For all I know the being doesn't know or wants to jerk me around. I'm a mortal being and it's just dangling the prospect of truth out there in front of me. So, I don't trust it.

So, if it wants to tell me so be it, otherwise I'm not playing any games.

So the answer to the beings question is "what do you want?"

 

[variant]

I can't believe you guys are so stingy about this.

I'd cut my own dominant arm off with a rusty, dull knife, fry it up, and eat it for the answer.

Obviously you're more credulous of the motives of proposed powerful beings.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If it wants something from me it should ask and we would deal with one another.

For all I know the being doesn't know or wants to jerk me around. I'm a mortal being and it's just dangling the prospect of truth out there in front of me. So, I don't trust it.

So, if it wants to tell me so be it, otherwise I'm not playing any games.

But you already have the premise this being is going to be honest. Trust should not be an issue.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Obviously you're more credulous of the motives of proposed powerful beings.

I already have the premise in this theoretical situation that the being is both going to be honest and accurate with their answer, so I know I won't get cheated out of the answer I seek.

 

[variant]

I already have the premise in this theoretical situation that the being is both going to be honest and accurate with their answer, so I know I won't get cheated out of the answer I seek.

That can't be part of the premise unless you are somehow telepathic, in which case why don't you just read its mind for the answer too.

In your theoretical situation I am a being that knows things I can't possibly know so should I answer for myself or this other guy?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I can't believe you guys are so stingy about this.

I'd cut my own dominant arm off with a rusty, dull knife, fry it up, and eat it for the answer.

Why?

Para pretty much pointed out what I was thinking...there's nothing you can do with this knowledge. Also, it's something you'll find out eventually for free. You aren't going to be able to convince anyone of what the answer is...even if you could, who cares? Even if the answer turned out to be some afterlife heaven and hell scenario...you still don't know what gets you into heaven or keeps you from hell. Morality doesn't change with this knowledge...so arguably, neither would the way you live your life.

It's a mystery sure...but so is "how much wood could a woodchuck chuck?" and I'm certainly not going to go out of my way for that knowledge either. It's useless knowledge.

 

[quatona]

The point is that you don't know. For all you know all you need to do is answer the question honestly.

So, since I am not interested in the answer I would have to answer dishonestly?

 

[PsychoSarah]

So, since I am not interested in the answer I would have to answer dishonestly?

Or not answer at all. But yes, giving a dishonest answer will just make said being leave.