On Invincibility

If you're like me, you survive death-defying feats about once every three days. And I'm not talking about the tightrope with a safety net here; we're talking look-ma-no-hands-watch-out-for-that-semi! Ok...maybe not once every three days. But it happens a lot. Each time, do you wonder why your still alive? Seriously, why haven't I died yet?

I think it comes down to one of two possiblities: either I have catlike reflexes and a spider-sense for imminent danger, or another JBP gets killed and out of the two of us I just keep getting the lucky draw. For example, it's possible I died twice on the way home today. In the first instance, a car turned in front of me and there's a possible world (think, Sliding Glass Doors) where I slammed into the side of the car and went flying over it (cracking my neck as I bounced once off the roof) to land in a puddle in a world-silencing "hummmphck" as the misty pavement takes on a characteristic red sheen. But I, not that guy (who, might I add, has shared in every single one of my life experiences, only separated off in his own world), am in this world. An arbitrary distinction, right? Logically speaking, for any set of compossible statements about each of my close-calls, it is necessarily true that at least one of us died in that situation and that at least one of us lived. And the kicker is, there's no distinction between me being the one or the other. True, I have causal efficaciousness to this life, but I can't cause the other JBP to do or not do anything anymore than I can call him up and reminisce about that time at band camp when I (and, hence, he)...well, you get the idea. So, maybe I am banking my own life on both my catlike reflexes and my twin getting killed. But is the fact that I get to choose if I live or die any better in the long run? Since it's logically necessary (which is much more necessary than just causally necessary) that one of us dies, I'm killing him as I apply the brakes.

Who've you killed lately?