My Historical Thought Experiment
13 April 2008
My Historical Thought Experiment
image:
A thought experiment poses a hypothetical scenario, often physically impossible or at least highly improbable. It attempts to set up conditions that, if we are willing to wrap our minds around the proposed situation, can help us gain some personal insights. What follows is an exercise I’ve devised and worked on myself for a number of years. You may wonder, after reading it, if I need serious therapy. But, if you’re feeling adventurous, consider the following:
God visits you (and separately, multiple others, each chosen at random) with a proposal. He will send you to a newly created world that is identical to Earth in the year 100 AD to begin to live what will become a long series of different lives eventually culminating back in the present. For each possible life He will select a few families, each of whom has a teenage child who is near death due to some illness and, without intervention, God knows would die. You would choose one of those lives to assume. Then God ‘plants’ the non-physical you into that body with all prior memory of that person’s language, culture, family history, etc. But the original person would then no longer live, you would become them. And from that point you would live the remaining life in this context, however long it might be. Upon your death God would appear again and provide the next set of possible lives to choose from. With each one you live time would continually advance through the centuries, uninterrupted. So if, for example, your 100 AD life began as an 18 year-old and you lived 40 years and died at 58, your next life would begin in the year 140, as another teen at some other place and family context. At the end of this long ‘journey’ you would return to your present life as if only an instant of time had elapsed. Of course, you would be significantly changed by all this, but those around you in this life would not be aware that anything had happened to you.
So why would God want to do this? He tells you He wants a sample of people to live through the history of Christianity, experience much more than is possible in one short lifetime, and form their own conclusions about what takes place and why God might act as He does. Consequently your options for locations throughout this timeframe would probably range from Byzantium in the East to Ireland in the West, at least until America comes into the picture. Several conditions are made clear to you at the outset. First, God is totally indifferent as to whether you agree to do this or not. There should be no sense of duty factored into your decision. It should be done or not purely by your preferences. Second, this is not some virtual reality, some brain-in-a-vat fake world like in the movie The Matrix. These will be real people you will live with who will have eternal destinies, just like you do. Third, your personal choices will continue to count in your own salvation, exactly as it is here in each of our regular lives. But it will be a nearly two millennium span, rather than just the proverbial ‘three score and ten’. Fourth (and this is tricky), while everyone including you has freedom, God will do a little steering so that the course of this new world’s history will at least parallel ours. This is so your advantage of perspective does not result in you radically altering events there. You can try to do whatever you want during these lives and will not be hindered by God. So in theory you could revolutionize medicine, invent things way before their time, etc. But somehow (I’m not privy to the details ), God will keep the future in this world roughly parallel (though obviously not identical) to our own. This is so you and the others who agree can actually experience something close to the history of our Christian era. Ok then. God tells you all this during His visit and, at the end, says He will return in one day for your decision.
Now, with a little thought you surely can find many possible holes in my setup. Everything from how could 1900 years there zip by in an instant here, to whether God can really make a random choice (if you believe He can, perhaps you are a closet Open Theist ). But be charitable. I make no pretense of an airtight story. My purpose is different, but I hope important and worth thinking about.
The central question then, is would you do it? Remember, God will not reward or punish you for your choice. It is just whether you want to, or not. So how would you decide? What might be the benefits and what could be the cost? It is for this exploration that the experiment is devised.
Certainly the more familiarity you have with history and what life might be like during these varying times would help you make a more informed decision. But you’ve been given only 24 hours. So let’s at least consider some of the more obvious issues.
First, a clear negative. There would be no modern medicine. This goes way beyond missing Tylenol. Quick death from disease or injury is the least potential problem in this situation as you would (contrary to our reality) move on to another life. But instead of dying you might linger in a chronically ill and/or painful situation for many years. And, with only (possibly) the family as a safety net, this could be compounded by poverty and malnutrition.
Then there is the issue of repeated separation. You could live in perhaps 50 or more different contexts. In many of them you would develop at least friendships if not fall in love. But you and your loved ones will die. You move on but they will not be with you. Perhaps you would find the love of your live in the sixth century. You would then carry this separation loss for at least the next 1300 years. And the more you love the more the separations will hurt. Perhaps you might then try to insulate yourself from caring, to protect yourself from the inevitable pain. And how would these loves change you and your present commitments once you finished the journey and returned to this life? Would they be irreparably damaged by the quantity of experience and baggage you would return with? Would you even be anything like the person who left?
This is starting to look very grim. Maybe you should just wait for heaven and rent the DVD. But isn’t participation more interesting and valuable than spectating? Our lives are invested with meaning when we must act and our choices really matter. And risk seems almost to be reward’s Siamese twin. Our present culture is heavily skewed toward passivity and comfort. But where is the challenge and value in that? We grow personally through action and reflection on whether we chose wisely. These are truly core values for a life well lived. And we would bring valuable perspective if placed in the past. Since our actions count and we would be living with real, not virtual people, we could make a major difference in their lives. Suppose in the year 850 you were the Seigneur of a feudal manor, responsible for the welfare of many people. What typically happened historically was that the aristocracy exploited the peasantry. But you could be different.
Now I’ve just barely scratched the surface of issues to consider in answering the ‘would you do it?’ question. You might have the option (or perhaps at times be forced) to live as a different gender from what you now are. How would that change your perspective? Is that interesting, or distressing, to you? And you should not assume your options would always include ‘high-impact’ situations. Would you take on a cloistered life? Or that of a serf? Or a persecuted Medieval Jew? But would these lives be so bad to live? You are quite likely to have privilege and comfort presently. Wouldn’t you learn and mature greatly from some living without so much of those things?
How you decide would surely depend on how risk-adverse you are. This crazy scenario can help you reflect on that. The rewards, at least the ones I’ve suggested (your mileage may vary), are fairly intangible or abstract. And the risks could turn out to involve protracted lengths of suffering or drudgery. Yet we all realize that many people are willing to endure much for these intangibles, as they can be among our deepest values.
So, I leave you the question. What would you choose? You’ve got 24 hours.
Rich Hannon is a software engineer who lives in Salt Lake City. His reading interests focus on philosophy and medieval history.
Search
- Donna Haerich on Desmond Ford on the Atonement
- Nic Samojluk on A Review of "For the Sake of the Gospel" by Des Ford
- Don Rhoads on What's So Funny About Community Organizing?
- Don Barton on A Review of "For the Sake of the Gospel" by Des Ford
- Gillian Ford on Desmond Ford on the Atonement
- Gillian Ford on LiveBlogging - Built Ford Tough
- B Jones on Book Club Discussion--Christianity and Homosexuality: Some Adventist Perspectives
- Jared Wright on LiveBlogging - Built Ford Tough
- PLM on A Review of "For the Sake of the Gospel" by Des Ford
- Mike MacLennan on A Review of "For the Sake of the Gospel" by Des Ford
User login
© Copyright 2008 Adventist Forums 
Comments
Great plot for a sci-fi novel. As such, it would have far more impact, it seems.
This sounds a lot like The Boat of a Million Years by Poul Anderson. It begins in ancient Greece and finally ends on worlds near the Galactic center in the distant future when science has perfected imortality based on the natural processes of the imortals who are the protagonists of Anderson's novel. Anderson's novel is peopled by imortal humans, freaks of nature, who have to reinvent themselves in new guises from time to time to avoid persecution. When they have lived into the far future, science is able to rearrange their sexuality at the chromosome level and not like today's sex change doctors. This bit from your scenario reminded me of Anderson's novel more than the other details you give.
Perhaps you read this novel 20 years ago and it stayed in your mind until it took this present shape. You, of course, interject God, instead of chance, into the equation.
I, for one, enjoy thought experiments especially when they take religion into consideration. Thank you for a good Sunday afternoon read. God bless.
p.s. I probably would opt out of such a reincarnation oriented life. Living one life and getting it right is enough hard work for most, don't you think? To have to do it for 2,000 years sounds like masochism to me.
Do I get to ask God questions before I make my decision? You say, "So why would God want to do this? He tells you He wants a sample of people to live through the history of Christianity, experience much more than is possible in one short lifetime, and form their own conclusions about what takes place and why God might act as He does." Could I ask God, and then what?
Does He/She have a task in mind for those who take the challenge? The answer to that question would be pretty important to me in making a decision. If taking this challenge gives one the opportunity to interact with God in a special way it would certainly be tempting.
Would writing the novel of this sci-fi challenge come close enough to living it? And how has thinking about it changed your actions, Rich? Your experience thinking about it would be enlightening, too.
I want to know what it says about me if my instant, unreflective answer is, "You bet your life I'd take the offer! Where do I sign?"
I may just be too curious for my own good...
Raul: Sorry, I never read the book you mentioned. But there is nothing totally new under the sun.
Bonnie: Yes, you could ask God questions. And you raise an important additional line of thought with your other questions concerning God's purpose in all this and your ostensible role if you accepted the challenge. I omitted discussing this mostly because I was already bumping up against 1500 words and had plenty on the table already. Also, when our personal cost/benefit gets too entangled with God's purpose then there might be a real skewing toward duty - go and 'take a bullet' for the Lord. And I wanted to avoid muddying things.
So there are really two threads going on here, at least as I've thought about it. But both, I guess, have to do with a broadened perspective. I think we drastically underappreciate how peoples' world views vary across time (and also geographically). Being a history geek I tend to read somewhat in search of what these varied perspectives might be, then muse on where and how I would be a different 'me' if I spent my life swimming in such different worlds. Also, I don't think writing a novel about it would be anything like living it.
On the God side of the equation, He must project universals to people locked into these little worlds. Would we discern more of His purpose with a dramatically broadened perspective? I would think yes, somewhat. But even more important IMO, He has to deal with how to build a safe yet free future world. And His handling of the Problem of Evil would seem to be intertwined with this goal. Yet His actions are certainly far from clear. The best theodicy I've been able to patch together is still quite unsatisfying. So, would there be a better understanding of this with 1900 year-old witnesses? Dunno. I am presuming God will eventually explain why this train-wreck of a world should go on so long. And frankly, whatever 'explanation' one presumably gets on all this from Job, doesn't cut it for me.
Hi Rich!
I was thinking of signing up until you pointed out all the separation from loved ones "I" would experience. So "I" have decided: "No thank you!"
But "I" fear that the scenario may presuppose somthing that "I" don't. This is that "I" can be the same person despite all these changes.
You write: "Then God ‘plants’ the non-physical you into that body with all prior memory of that person’s language, culture, family history, etc."
This won't work for "me" for at least two reasons:
(1) It is impossible for "me" to imagine separating the physical and non-physical "me." "I" am either both or not at all.
(2) To "my" way of thinking, memory and nothing but memory makes identity. What "I" recollect and what others recall is the only thing that keeps "me" and them thinking from day to day that "I" am still the same person.
If "I" were given the memories of someone else, "I" would not be "me." "I" would be that person with nothing remaining. This would be true to a lesser degree if others remembered "me" differently.
"My" identity is a very fragile convergence of what "I" and others recall. Identity is hard to find and easy to lose, as evidenced by all "those" who are trying to discover who "they" actually "are." Good luck!
God would gain nothing by doing this. The results would be no different than if God had chosen a completely different person from each era.
This is fun! Thank you!!
Dave
Dave: you bring up the important issue of identity. You're choking a bit on the 'mind meld' part of my setup when you state: 'If "I" were given the memories of someone else, "I" would not be "me." "I" would be that person with nothing remaining.' Well, no. You'd be some kind of merged entity with memories of both sides.
But your point is still valid & of concern. Actually, what I was trying to do with this supposition was purely pragmatic. Lives are lived in context. And to 'drop in' to various contexts would accelerate the momentum of gaining a richer experience. But, FWIW I could patch this problem up a bit in various ways. Memories vary, I think, in terms of what they contribute to this elusive "I". Things like remembering that I was in Chicago yesterday, or had fish for supper or my mom yelled at me last week would be necessary to function if dropped into a life and be able to proceed somewhat undetected (although a fascinating and under-appreciated take on this problem is found in the old film 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'). But other memories, like - how I felt when her golden hair was reflected by the moonlight, and her hand touched my cheek - are less name-rank-serial-number memories and much more deeply embedded into our personhood.
So one patch for the setup would be to have God 'bleach' out the memory components from the dying teen that would compromise your original "I-ness" and leave just the basics that you needed to function. Another fix-up would be to bag the body inhabiting part and just have God generate a fresh contextless body after each death, provide the necessary linguistic & social knowledge so you wouldn't get hanged within a week :-) - and plop you outside the gates of some town - and then you're on your own.
But your identity concerns would not disappear, even if you were happier with some possible band-aid like I'm suggesting. This issue could profitably occupy its own thread (at least for the hyperbolically reflective!).
I alluded I think to your more central concern when I wrote 'Would you even be anything like the person who left?' And that's a biggie. After 1900 years of likely serial monogamy what would that do to my relationship with my left-behind wife, for example? Probably major damage.
You note '"My" identity is a very fragile convergence of what "I" and others recall.' Yes but the 'who am I really' problem doesn't disappear if my crazy scenario gets (perhaps deservedly?) deep-sixed. You write: 'It is impossible for "me" to imagine separating the physical and non-physical "me."' Ok. But which physical you? When I (hopefully) am resurrected or translated what body will God instantiate me with? That handsome, virile 21-year-old hunk I was (in my dreams, anyway)? Or my present middle-aged sorta creaky body? Or maybe a future 89-year-old Parkinsonian, needing a motorized wheel chair? The default view of course is we return to the flower of youth. But how much of me - essential and valuable me - is the result of other bodily contexts? And what me-ness is lost if I don't get the right body? And for those - e.g. Stephen Hawking - who got shafted (bodily speaking), will they lose some important essential me-ness if they are one day given functional equipment?
Ah, the questions just keep on flowing ...
Rich Hannon: "I am presuming God will eventually explain why this train-wreck of a world should go on so long. "
I think God is a loving being. I didn't always feel that way. I'm glad I'm beginning to feel so more and more. However, I've always suspected that there is so much more that has happened and is happening behind the scenes that would explain why all of this imperfection and pain has been with planet Earth for either 6,000 years (conservative estimate) or millions of years (progressive estimate.)
I've sometimes thought that perhaps revelation is imperfect and we've assumed too much from what sacred writings he has bequeathed to humankind. Could it be that God lets this often tragic world continue because it's up to those he created in his own image to finally get it right by themselves? Did he not give us the basic tools to accomplish this, e.g., our minds? If you believe that it's taken millions of years for humanity to arrive at this point in history, might it not take a million more to make it to God's realm instead of us waiting for him to return to our realm. But wasn't this what the builders of the tower of Babel were set on doing, "making it to God's realm" They failed, the bible tells us. Perhaps all attempts at reaching God physically are meant to fail. The best we can do is try to reach him in spiritual ways.
When Jesus said "I come quickly" or that he's coming soon, he must have meant just that. Even the disciples believed such. Something must have happened that we don't know about to delay Jesus' return so much.
If Jesus doesn't come in the next thousand years, then we really should go out in search of him. I mean this in the most serious way. It is not an expression of doubt, just of mild bewilderment.
Post new comment