Sounds like "I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream" to me (both the short story and the game).

they seem like they make sense to me. and i admit i find your puzzleing logic intriguing.

I am not sure what you mean by 'evil'. I do not quantify things in such absolute terms of black and white. We lead our lives through believing what is 'right' and 'true' as being our reality. However what is 'right and 'true' are vague concepts and only perspectives if you will.Thus this 'reality' could very well be an illusion for all we know -

That's the literal mindfuck since most criminals are products of a dysfunctional or delusional society or have acted in a manner that they have deemed as being 'correct' in a difficult situation or may well be perfectly rational people who have acted out of impulse.The idea of morality is a very complex thing and I could go on here....

However for the sake of argument I shall bite and assume you speak of social delinquents such as sociopaths or mass murderers. Here, as psychological profiling of such criminals will tell you is that these individuals have a warped perception of reality or a twisted moral compass. They actually feel no remorse for their actions and actually believe what they are doing is 'right'. So to punish them effectively serves little purpose and there is no need to do something 'drastic' of course such as altering their brain; while it would be possible to do that and make them functional members of society at least theoretically. However change can be induced to an extent even by CBT or cognitive behavior therapy as it is known. The criminal justice system is not without its flaws.

It is much easier if we do not actually quantify things in absolutes of good and evil but rather actions and consequences.

In the words of the joker" "Ladies and Gentlemen! You've read about it in the papers! Now witness, before your very eyes, that most rare and tragic of nature's mistakes! I give you: the average man. Physically unremarkable, it instead possesses a deformed set of values. Notice the hideously bloated sense of humanity's importance. Also note the club-footed social conscience and the withered optimism. It's certainly not for the squeamish, is it? Most repulsive of all, are its frail and useless notions of order and sanity. If too much weight is placed upon them... they snap. How does it live, I hear you ask? How does this poor pathetic specimen survive in today's harsh and irrational environment? I'm afraid the sad answer is, "Not very well." Faced with the inescapable fact that human existence is mad, random, and pointless, one in eight of them crack up and go stark slavering buggo! Who can blame them? In a world as psychotic as this... any other response would be crazy!"

They only make sense under certain conditions, which is why I'm curious what Lionel makes of them. It's an acid test of sorts - depending on the answers and their justification, we can inquire further to better understand his position.

Very well, I shall humor you. Neither of those statements is necessarily valid since it does not guarantee an outcome and is entirely a whimsical proposition IMO.

Let me rephrase that...
Is it more like "Grass is red" (false but not nonsensical) OR "My bachelor friend's wife is a brunette" (nonsensical, not capable of being either true or false) ?
Were my sentences merely quirky or were they self-contradictory (if so - how ?) ?

(abre los ojos...

abre los ojos...)

I don't believe in an afterlife, so this virtual thingy sounds interesting!
You would have to assure me, with evidence good enough to me, these here things:
1) That I will be able to commit virtual suicide if I so desire at any point. (Because eternity... it's way too fucking long.)
2) That my mind won't go into some sort of "senile" state where it forgets it's in a virtual afterlife (Because that would be a Hellish existence, even if I'm in bliss).
3) That nobody will be able to tamper with my "personal domain" (Because of obvious reasons).
4) I would also like it if there aren't virtual entities passing off as real uploaded minds.

What does boggle the mind is the philosophical question that you guys have been discussing: will it *really* be me in there or will it be just a perfect copy indistinguishable from me (but the "real" me has died and ceased to exist)? All in all, this "ceasing to exist" may happen every time we go to sleep or maybe every hour (Or maybe it's every 561 days, why not?). So the virtual world is the best way to ensure survival of if not ourselves, almost ourselves.

if you've been following along, you'll note that some people have surmised that that already happens in real life, people get bonked on the head and their personalitys change drastically, thus they are new people entirely. i don't believe that but whatever.

Please elaborate on your definition of true immortality. Physically, it's probably impossible.

I will quote a greek philosopher by the name Heraclitus of Ephesus. He said "The only constant is change". I think a french writer and Einstein said something similar.

This would depend on the conditional hypothesis. If I am to assume
A)All pretty girls wear daisies in their hair then the first instance is correct.
B)If a different brain would change your taste perception to be favorable towards pizzas then the second instance could also be true.

Thus both statements are valid and capable of being true or false.

I would like to live on in the state of bliss that you get a hint of when you are really, really blissfully warm, if anyone gets that.

I always said my ideal death would be from an instant fiery inferno flash firewave. I know, I am odd.

For that to be the case, you had to assume that I could be a girl or have a different brain. If personal identity was only a (by)product of a particular neural network, "I" would be very narrowly defined. As a matter of fact, I can't even begin to fathom HOW narrowly, if we were to account for changes through time (drastic or otherwise).
If I could be who I am not, there is more to being someone than just a skullful of squishy matter. It is, of course, extremely difficult to verbalize this clearly... but we are looking through SOMEONE'S eyes, aren't we ? It might have as well been someone else's and we'd see different sights, likely have different memories (maybe harbor an uncanny fondness for daisies, who knows ?)... but it could be US looking.

I still find it funny that people usually quote boredom as an argument against eternal life. I mean boredom is a signal that one of our natural needs is not satisfied. I don't think that in a hypothetical afterlife where everyone has turned into a purely spiritual (or virtual) being we still feel the same urges as in life. What if we don't feel the urge for new input anymore, what if it's just a constant and eternal feeling of satisfaction and peace? Sure, sounds boring to most of us now, but once we're there it's probably pretty awesome. Already in life some people (most notably buddhists, I guess) seem to go for this exact state by meditating. Sounds good to me.

But before anyone complains: yeah, I'm aware that paradoxically this kind of afterlife may actually kill the need for an afterlife. This is some deep shit, ain't it. :P