Hal wrote:
>If imperfect or diverged copies are to be considered as 
>lesser-degree selves, is there an absolute rule which applies, 
>an objective reality which governs the extent to which two 
>different individuals are the same "self", or is it ultimately 
>a matter of taste and opinion for the individuals involved to 
>make the determination?  Is this something that reasonable 
>people can disagree on, or is there an objective truth about 
>it that they should ultimately come to agreement on if they 
>work at it long enough?

The way I see it, "Me" or my self is a poorly defined concept. It can refer
to a number of different things. It could refer to my physical body (now or
in the past or future); the mind that is part of *this* physical body (now
or in the past or future); any mind or body indentical to this mind or body;
any mind or bosy similar to this mind or body; etc. What you attach the
descriptor "me" to is really a matter only of taste or context. One could
try to tighten the definition of "me" to make it non-ambiguous, but then
inevitably this will run afoul of one of the various thought experiments
this list enjoys entertaining.

Jonathan Colvin


Reply via email to