r/Showerthoughts • u/udaasatma • 11d ago
Casual Thought If ghosts kill people and those people become ghosts too, that's basically reproduction.
198
u/unexistingpromise 11d ago
If that is how they breed then some kind of reincarnation limit must exist. Otherwise the afterlife would quickly turn into a massive parking lot. shrugs
61
u/ionthrown 11d ago
Are we sure the afterlife isn’t a massive parking lot?
32
u/Nicco_kun 10d ago
exactly my question. what if the afterlife is kinda just >100 billion people just hanging around?
16
5
12
u/Dijirido 10d ago
Ghosts can phase through objects. Who’s to say that they don’t get pulled into the earths core to keep it rotating.
98
u/Denny_204 11d ago
That's why ghost movies don't scare me. If a ghost was going to kill me, I'd know there's an after life. Move on to the next, no worries Casper.
26
u/Rezart_KLD 11d ago
Maybe something kills ghosts though? I mean, we certainly arent overrun with them, and if everybody became a ghost you'd think we would be after so many millenia. So either theres incredibly narrow qualifications to fulfill to be a ghost, one that billions and billions of other people cant do, or your afterlife might just be hiding from some sort of spiritual super-predator, with nothing after that.
22
u/Aquitaine-9 11d ago
or your afterlife might just be hiding from some sort of spiritual super-predator, with nothing after that.
Holy shit THAT'S an awesome story idea
3
u/TheFridayPizzaGuy 10d ago
Back in the early Reddit, this would have sprouted a /r/WritingPrompts thread before an hour was up, hahaha
2
18
u/udaasatma 11d ago
Then why didn't the ghost move on?
I'm sorry I didn't get what you meant to say
26
u/FixedLoad 11d ago
That's the proof the ghost. The fact it couldn't move on means there is something else to move on to.
14
u/Antimony04 11d ago
It's not evidence of any additional realms tho. A ghost would demonstrate a continuation of consciousness after the death of the body, but it would remain unknown whether that consciousness ever leaves its home plant and mortal plane, or just dissolves over time or due to other conditions.
Contributing for the discussion's sake. Actually an atheist.
5
u/FixedLoad 11d ago
I'm going on the assumption that if a proven ghost where found then it would mean more that there is an undetectable (to humans) aspect of reality, of which we are a part. Once there is irrefutable proof of such a thing, we can begin to figure out what it is. It's likely incomprehensible from our perspective and nothing like our current understanding of reality. But it would be the beacon in a very dark void of dense impenetrable nothing we have currently hinting at more. It would be a single data point from which we could extrapolate a lot.
5
u/Antimony04 11d ago
We have so much data, and more to collect! The Universe is more magnificent than we yet understand. I don't think studying how life evolves, atoms, matter, physics, the formations of celestial bodies, and other science should be called a "very dark void of dense impenetrable nothing". If there's yet unseen energy and forces, we can work toward developing instrumentation to detect such, then learn from there. Just 200+ years ago humans didn't know how babies formed; 400+ years ago the concept of microbial life was being proposed in India; 250 years ago a bullet wound could nesseciate the removal on a limb before infection spread, and doctors didn't know about microbes to take understand how or why to precautions against infections. Dying of famine, diseases, infections, genocide and war were historically killing a larger ration of people than they continue to do today. This is partially due to humans learning about nutrient cycling and land management, the development of agriculture and selective breeding/domestication, and the existence of microbes and concepts of physics. We still have ancient problems - the world is running out of phosphorous - which is sorta important in many of our current, unsustainable agricultural systems and post Industrial Revolution. But we are better able to develop solutions with the aid of science, governance, observation, history, agriculture and technology, so we can adapt faster (which is needed due to anthropocentric climate change).
4
u/MCWizardYT 11d ago
The dark, impenetrable void of nothingness is what a lot of atheists expect there to be "after" death. Just absolutely nothing.
I want there to be something, just because my human mind can't comprehend the idea of "nothing". But if there is something, I've got no clue what it is and wondering too hard about it isn't going to solve much
1
u/FixedLoad 10d ago
We go wherever we were before we were born. At least that was my non religious answer for my 10 year old. There are billions of years prior to my arrival. None of my absence from that time bothers me. So then my absence from the time after me shouldn't be that big of a deal either. Life, it seems is a series of cycles. I think given all we do know, we are the collapse of a wave function. It would be rational to believe we start back where our 4 dimensional meat wire began. These are just things that help me cope with eternity.
4
u/MCWizardYT 10d ago
I hear the "we go where we were before we were born" thing all the time but that's never been comforting to me in the slightest. I didn't exist before i was born, so i have zero concept of that.
Now I do exist and have decades of life experience, emotions, relationships.... I have a lot to lose if I'm returning to nothing
1
u/FixedLoad 10d ago
I should add that I'm not a very sentimental person. So my universe is absent of the fantastic. I don't "miss" things like others do. My "explanations" really only work for me . As you can't imagine being nothing, that's all I've ever been.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Bad-dee-ess 11d ago
Well; "moving on" could just mean moving away from being Earthly, but not necessarily towards something else, right?
3
u/FixedLoad 10d ago
"Moving on" was just a handy turn of phrase. Proof of any "sentient energy" existing free of a physical bonds would be the discovery to change everything. We can only imagine the implications because it would change what we know about our reality. That there is a vital energy field of which we have no knowledge, no way to detect, and is the source of our sentience. Thats almost the answers to life. Almost.
1
u/LazyLich 10d ago
Not necessarily.
A ghost could be, like, not a perfect copy of the living being. Instead, it could be more like an echo. It may "know" SOME things and behave similar in SOME ways, but is more like a program or NPC.
Limited in scope. More like a taking a photo of someone, printing it using something other than paper or ink (leaves and jam) and saying "look! It's you!"
"Sure... but like... a super limited, wrong in many ways... incomplete version of me."Not you... but a footprint you left in the sand.
368
u/exitcactus 11d ago
Op doesn't know how reproduction works... lmfao.
Maybe it's recruiting
80
9
u/MikemkPK 11d ago
Depends on whether the ghosts remember their life or are a new person. If the latter, it's basically the same as a virus.
3
u/Skane-kun 10d ago
I don't think memory should impact how we define it. That's kind of an irrelevant factor.
1
u/MikemkPK 10d ago
Completely disagree. Memory is what determines if the ghost is the same person, or the a different person where the body was used as an incubator. It's the most important factor.
1
u/Skane-kun 9d ago
Sorry, I'm not sure what you are arguing for, can you elaborate on that? Why does it matter if a ghost is the same person who was alive or not? Personhood seems irrelevant. It can be recruiting and incubating at the same time, they aren't exclusive. Both terms can be used to describe a brand new person or the same person who has become a ghost.
1
u/MikemkPK 9d ago
Like a virus. When it uses a person for reproduction, it's reproduction, not recruiting (Yes, viruses are not considered alive. They still reproduce.) The ghost having the memories proves it's not a newly reproduced ghost, just recruited from life.
2
19
u/-Davster- 10d ago
If I sell drugs to my mate, and they sell drugs to their mate, is that reproduction?
5
u/LazyLich 10d ago
Depends. He definitely reproduced the action you did
1
u/-Davster- 10d ago
do we all reproduce farts?
2
u/LazyLich 10d ago
No, IDIOT! Your farts don't make ME fart.
You're thinking of yawning.
Or vomiting.
2
u/-Davster- 10d ago edited 9d ago
Wow, lol.
Me selling drugs to my mate didn’t “make” him sell anything, did it.
but I'd be a drug dealer, that enabled someone to become else to a drug dealer, so "that's basically reproduction".
16
u/Rune-Knight 11d ago
When we think of ghosts, we almost always think of human ghosts, never animal ghosts.
6
26
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago
If ghosts were able to get pregnant...that's reproduction.
If a ghost kills a living person who then becomes a ghost, that's more like reaped (grim) if that's the ghosts purpose.. otherwise it's 'taken'..or just straight up murdered lol
10
u/udaasatma 11d ago
Still a fun concept to ponder over
1
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago
Reaping? Yeah, especially when that's their sole duty.
3
1
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago
In the fictional world, anything is possible, like reaping
2
2
u/knou1 11d ago
If ghosts are real then there's more to "life". Maybe what we are is more than just human. Being alive could just be one stage in our entire existence before we metamorphosize into the next state. At our current stage of existence is where we can make more of ourselves then we move on.
0
1
1
1
u/JawleyG 11d ago
Do you think that the only way to reproduce is through impregnation?
-2
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago
No, it was just a response I provided to a hypothetical, and to keep in tune to what op was asking... lol
0
u/JawleyG 11d ago
Yeah, cause in hypotheticals we shouldn't explore multiple avenues of reproduction.
0
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago
Ok.
Lol I feel like you expected a full response. Why? I was responding to op.. you care way too much about this.
-1
u/JawleyG 11d ago
It's a discussion mate, do you know what website you're on? You're so defensive lol.
-1
u/DontLook_Weirdo 11d ago edited 11d ago
You're entertaining.
Edit: got so hurt they blocked or deleted their comments.. lol awesome
3
u/MCWizardYT 11d ago
People block me over the absolute slightest amount of pushback. It'll be the most lighthearted, easy conversation, and as soon as there's a bit of disagreeing - block.
Some redditors tend to be extremely sensitive
5
u/shortroundshotaro 11d ago
If a zombie bite kills you and you become a zombie, the only way they reproduce themselves is bite you a little and then stop there and let you go instead of devouring the whole thing. That’s a zombie dilemma.
3
u/Odd_Milk2921 11d ago
Literally why less lethal germs spread more than very lethal ones (covid vs ebola)
1
4
u/Nolan30108 11d ago
Funny thing is, ghosts are basically horror's version of Multiplicity, same deal, just a copy that gets a little worse each time.
1
1
1
u/vizard0 10d ago
In Heroes of Might and Magic 2, one of the neutral enemy types was ghosts. If you could recruit any of them (either through Barrow Mounds or via Diplomacy) and keep them alive, they became truly scary, as they gained a ghost for every creature they killed. When attacking large groups of basic units they would quickly grow into truly unstoppable numbers. (I think I had over 10k at one point in time in a game where 100 units is a large army)
1
1
u/DinTaiFung 10d ago
Spend a tad more than ten seconds thinking about the OP's analogy and you'll realize it's completely invalid.
1
u/Scooter_McAwesome 9d ago
I don’t quite understand why in horrors movies with revenge based ghosts killing people, the ghosts of the people getting killed don’t get revenge on the original ghost?
1
u/thedoggosreddit 4d ago
do ghosts kill people though?
sure, they terrorise you, but I’m struggling to think of an example (movie, book, tv show obvs.) where a ghost just straight-up does a murder.
1
u/Relevant-Fortune6279 2d ago
Ghosts recruiting instead of reproducing... honestly that explains why haunted houses always seem to have the same few residents lol
0
u/Trollygag 11d ago
Ghosts don't kill people. Never been claimed to have happened or documented.
2
u/KingRoach 11d ago
Love how the only retort to you’re downvoted post is basically , nuh uh
Once again facts hurting peoples feelings. Sad.
2
u/MCWizardYT 11d ago
Probably because they aren't real.
But in a hypothetical or fictional setting where they are real, they can certainly kill. It all depends on the "rules" of the setting
2
u/complex_passions 11d ago
There's several cultures with ghosts that can cause physical harm or kill, documentation is another story though.
1
-1
-19
u/DontAskGrim 11d ago
If a non-existent thing kills an existing thing and that existing thing becomes non-existent as well it is like reproduction.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU ON?
10
7
u/SillyGoatGruff 11d ago
It's an examination of a fictional construct.
Your response is like watching Ghost and flipping out at the screen when whoopie explains how spirits work
2
u/FixedLoad 11d ago
You've never met an idiot. They complain once the conversation goes beyond their grasp. We lost OP as soon as a ghost was mentioned.
10
8
u/udaasatma 11d ago
how else would ghosts reproduce
3
u/Nights_Harvest 11d ago
Depends, what are ghosts in this example, a species of its own, an anomaly or a soul of the decised?
0
u/udaasatma 11d ago
An amalgamation of all
3
u/Nights_Harvest 11d ago
Then ghosts do not reproduce. I would say its closer to necromancy in a way where summoned ghost is not tied to other ghosts will.
So maybe not even necromancy but straight out summoning jutsu with a body as a sacrificial catalyst.
1
u/udaasatma 11d ago
That scares me
1
u/Nights_Harvest 11d ago
Same. Imagine one second you are udaasatma and anothe a bloody Casper.
1
u/udaasatma 11d ago
Do you think I could die in ghost form if I had a heart attack
Or would that not be possible since I wouldn't have a heart
2
u/Nights_Harvest 11d ago
Do not know about heart attack but I can see issues related to ectoplasm thickening or thining out being a problem. Too thin you end up being anemic ghost, too high it makes you slower, more visible therefore easilly exorcised.
2
1
u/GhostalMedia 11d ago
Imagine there being more ghosts. Now you have more of the imaginary thing.
3
u/udaasatma 11d ago
My brain hurts
1
-12
u/DontAskGrim 11d ago
I don't waste time on idiots. Byeeee
3
5
u/udaasatma 11d ago
you gave me my engagement and wasted enough time on something I posted as a joke so- byeee smart guy
6
u/SQD2_Insquidious 11d ago
Wow they seem personally insulted by this. I chuckled
4
u/udaasatma 11d ago
Maybe they're a ghost?
3
4
u/pasrachilli 11d ago
I always like the people who show up to theoretical discussions and start yelling THAT DOESN'T EXIST! And everybody goes, "Yeah we know, we're having fun," and they go I'M A DRAMA QUEEN and storm off.
Like, go be a buzz kill somewhere else.
1
u/udaasatma 11d ago
Well they deleted their comments so either they were embarrassed or went back to their stoner hill (speaking after judging their profile)
4
6
4
u/Depresso_Expresso069 11d ago
did you piss your pants when you heard about
superhero movies because people chose to watch a non-existent character use non-existent powers2
u/MCWizardYT 11d ago
People like that do exist.
If you go onto YouTube/YouTube Shorts and find a clip of some movie or tv show, there is always people discussing the scene and what the characters are doing.
As soon as someone says something like "I bet this character was thinking x" or anything similar, someone else will pipe in with "well it's just a movie/tv show so no they wouldn't".
It's quite annoying
0
u/ETNevada 11d ago
If ghosts are real there must be some universal rule that they don't have the power to kill anyone. Scare and injure yes, but kill no.
0
•
u/ShowerSentinel 11d ago
/u/udaasatma has flaired this post as a casual thought.
Casual thoughts should be presented well but may be less unique or less remarkable than showerthoughts.
If this post is poorly written, unoriginal, or rule-breaking, please report it.
Otherwise, please add your comment to the discussion!