A question too unimportant for any place other than 'poly OT

[Victor Galis]

I would argue that all other things aside, the half containing my original brain is me, and the other is a copy.

I'd actually long considered this problem in a slightly different way: If we invented a way to teleport people, which actually disintegrated the person on one end then rebuilt an exact copy on the other side. Is that really teleportation, or cloning + death machine. What if the copy is built out of the original atoms?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
I would argue that all other things aside, the half containing my original brain is me, and the other is a copy.

I'd actually long considered this problem in a slightly different way: If we invented a way to teleport people, which actually disintegrated the person on one end then rebuilt an exact copy on the other side. Is that really teleportation, or cloning + death machine. What if the copy is built out of the original atoms?

For some reason I didn't consider this ambiguity in my original post but in fact I had intended to specify that the body was split into left and right halves such that both resulting individuals would possess exactly half of the original brain along with a perfect copy of the missing half.

as to the improtance of using original atoms I no longer think that can be important.

IIRC Physics tells us all atoms are not merely perfectly alike but that they have no individual identity, ie to swap two atoms is meaningless as absolutely no change has in fact occured.

On an even simpler level the brain turns over all it's atoms metabolically anyway (with some atoms in DNA having a much longer half life) so you never really get to keep your original atoms over time in any event.

[Straybow]

I am right-handed, therefore the original right half of me is the real me.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Straybow
I am right-handed, therefore the original right half of me is the real me.

but what about the fact that not only does the one with your original left half have a perfect copy of your right half attached to it but it also has your original left half of your brain that actually was controlling your right hand and conferring your right handedness onto you?

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Geronimo
as to the improtance of using original atoms I no longer think that can be important.

IIRC Physics tells us all atoms are not merely perfectly alike but that they have no individual identity, ie to swap two atoms is meaningless as absolutely no change has in fact occured.

On an even simpler level the brain turns over all it's atoms metabolically anyway (with some atoms in DNA having a much longer half life) so you never really get to keep your original atoms over time in any event.

To me it's the continuity that's important. The individual atoms are not so much important; however, if you replace all the atoms at once, you have in fact made a copy in my mind and destroyed the original, whereas if the original replaces some of its atoms it is still the original with some replacements that become part of the original quickly.

If you cut in half then each half, I hold that neither half is actually fully you. You have in fact ceased to exist and two semi-clones have now replaced you.

I don't think memories are important in determining identity. Suppose my friend has a nice computer. I build one just like it and copy the contents of his hard drive perfectly. Then for whatever reason his computer is destroyed. Have I stolen his computer, or do I have an exact copy?

I mean on a metaphysical level we can argue all we want about the exact nature of identity. I would argue though that any gap in the continuity of the existance of an individual implies death of that individual, and I do not believe that making copies, however perfect, constitutes ressurection.

[Dauphin]

Locke's sock

Originally posted by Victor Galis


To me it's the continuity that's important. The individual atoms are not so much important; however, if you replace all the atoms at once, you have in fact made a copy in my mind and destroyed the original, whereas if the original replaces some of its atoms it is still the original with some replacements that become part of the original quickly.

What if you replace all the atoms, not all at once, but still over an arbitrarily short length of time?

[TCO]

There is no "you". There is just a chemical reaction.

[TCO]

So...kill yourselves.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by TCO
So...kill yourselves.

are you in the habit of killing all chemical reactions you come across or just ones that are experiencing existential doubts?

[Victor Galis]

Re: Locke's sock

Originally posted by Dauphin


What if you replace all the atoms, not all at once, but still over an arbitrarily short length of time?

I would argue that there's some length of time it takes to assimilate new atoms into the existing structure. I have no idea what it is, it's a bit irrelevant to my philosophy though.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Geronimo


are you in the habit of killing all chemical reactions you come across or just ones that are experiencing existential doubts?

They are all just dust in the wind.

[TCO]

Anyone ever see the movie (or play) THE ROPE?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by TCO
Anyone ever see the movie (or play) THE ROPE?

How does it relate to any of this discussion?

[TCO]

Have you seen it? (Then will explain.)

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by TCO
Have you seen it? (Then will explain.)

I read the wiki article on hitchcocks version of it.