On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> >If there are OMs which don't
> > remember being you then they are not going to be part of your stream of
> > consciousness.
> There's the rub.  Almost all my OMs *do not* include consciously
> remembering being me (or anyone). And if you suppose there is an
> *unconscious* memory component of an OM then there's a problem with what it
> means to have an unconscious part of consciousness.

Well, how do you maintain a sense of being you in normal life? If you are
absent-mindedly staring at a tree you at least have a sense that you have
been staring at the tree, rather than drowning in the ocean a moment ago.
You are also aware that you haven't grown 10cm taller or suddenly changed
sex - that is, you would immediately be aware of these things had they
happened, even though you are not actively thinking about them or their
absence. So a bland sameness from moment to moment constitutes a sense of
memory and continuity of identity, since an OM that deviated substantially
from this would either not be considered as a successor OM or immediately
alert you that something strange had happened.

Stathis Papaioannou

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to