On Oct 27, 2012, at 2:54 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 10/27/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>> your eyes are sending signals to your brain of the White House
and not of the Kremlin, and there is nothing more profound about it.
> But the eyes of the copy get also the signals from Moscow.
Yes, so the guy in Moscow feels like the guy in Moscow because he's
the guy in Moscow. Big deal.
> So your explanation does not help to predict what will happen if
the experience is reitired.
True, it can't predict what will happen because what will happen is
a function of the external environment and how it stimulates the
eyes and it has nothing to do with the original or either copy.
Your entire philosophy is built on top of the question "Why is the
guy in Washington the guy in Washington?" and the answer of course
is "because he's the guy in Washington". With such a foundation its
no wonder it can't do much.
> The correct comp explanation, deep or not, explains why we
cannot make a better prediction
Then I no longer know what "comp" means because the real reason we
can't do better is the same reason we can't do better at predicting
next weeks weather, its too complicated.
Predicting is hard, especially the future.
John,
I am not sure if you are being consistent here. Earlier you said
you said you identify yourself with a stream of thoughts (not a
single thought). If you are identified with a stream of thoughts
then you can't simply say one brain is in Moscow and one is in
Washington and that is as deep as it goes, for you must consider
the first person continuum of experience and what they can predict
about where their consciousness will take them.
You agreed if you were instantly halted, taken apart and rebuilt
again (even with different atoms) from your own perspective nothing
would have skipped a beat, your stream of consciousness continues
right where it left off. But when you are taken apart
and two copies are created at two locations your stream diverges
among two paths, which gives rise to true unpredictability in the
first person perspective.
Physics makes it impossible that you could be instantly halted and
restarted at a different location.
We could anestatize him then destroy him. Or we could simulate his
neurons on a computer and halt that program.
Jason
Some people conclude that this means neither clone is John Clark, he
has been destroyed. I don't think it makes any difference, since
John Clark is presumed to persist across period of unconsciousness
by virtue of consistent memories and competences.
Brent
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
--
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
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.