Hi Stathis, Bruno, List,

>> the copy can be you in deeper and deeper senses (roughly speaking up
>> to the unspeakable "you = ONE").
>> I talk here on the first person "you". It is infinite and unnameable.
>> Here computer science can makes those term (like "unnameable") much
>> more precise.
> I don't see how the copy could be me in a deeper sense than having all
> my thoughts, memories etc. It would be like saying that if I wave my
> magic wand over you you will become specially blessed, even though
> nothing will actually change either subjectively or objectively.

You must take into account Bruno's Plotinian interpretation: the One, 
the Intellect, and the Universal Soul. In this sense, you can become 
more "you" in that you penetrate false knowledge "Maya" and realize your 
true nature (the Dao, if you like, roughly the ONE in Plotinus).

What I have come to wonder: you take the Löbian Machine to be the model 
of a person - say, a human. But what if the Löbian Machine is actually 
(and only) the ultimate person - the universal soul, in Plotinus' 

This would account for the infinite (continuum!) histories (lived 
through the lives of all beings in the multiverse), the "universal soul" 
forgetting itself in a cosmic play, sort of -  but also for COMP 
immortality - immortal would be the _universal soul_, but not 
necessarily "concrete" persons (as we conceive them, which requires at 
least some continuity of memory etc)


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

Reply via email to