On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 Terren Suydam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> if when that door is opened one of the collection of atoms arranged in >> a johnclarkian way is disrupted instantaneously, or at least too fast to >> form a last thought. In that scene from The Prestige one of them DID have a >> last thought and the other did not, and that last thought was "I am about >> to die". I don't like any last thought but especially that one. >> > > > What do you mean by "disrupted instantaneously"? > Which word didn't you understand? > > Why would that prevent that johnclarkian collection of atoms from dying > If there are 2 collections of atoms arranged in a johnclarkian way and one collection is disrupted then there is still something in the universe that is arranged in a johnclarkian way; and John Clark is an adjective not a noun, a adjective that still describes something that still exists, so John Clark still exists, and nothing died. In fact John Clark didn't even notice it when that one collection of atoms was disrupted. >> If they were no longer identical then they would both have an equal >> right to call themselves "John Clark" BUT they would no longer be each >> other, and so in matters of life and death they would both act in their >> individual self interest just as any 2 people you picked off the street at >> random would do. >> > > > Yes. So clearly, the two johnclarkian collections of atoms that are no > longer identical, would have their own thoughts and feelings and act in > their own self-interest, despite that they would both have equal right to > call themselves "John Clark". They would both have their own unique > first-person perspective, their own subjective experience. > Agreed. But that's just what you'd expect in everyday life, even though they violate no laws of physics matter duplicating machines haven't been invented yet so today 2 human brains are never even close to being identical, and that's why I think that version of the thought experiment to be rather dull. > > we finally get to the point. Since each johnclarkian collection of > atoms, after they diverge, would have their own unique first-person point > of view, it's trivial to see how this state of affairs is just like Bruno's > duplication scenario - after all, in Bruno's experiment both copies diverge > immediately as well. > No, they remain identical until they open the door of their duplicating chambers and saw different cities, until they opened those doors there were 2 bodies but only one individual and he was the Helsinki Man. It was the sight of Moscow after the door was opened that turned the Helsinki Man into the Moscow Man and it was the sight of Washington after the door was opened that turned the Helsinki Man into the Washington Man. So why am I the Moscow Man and not the Washington Man? Because I saw Moscow not Washington. What more needs to be said about it? > > So next time Bruno brings up '1p', instead of ridiculing the > terminology, just remember back to this thought experiment and substitute > the "1p view of Washington man" and "1p view of Moscow man" for the two > first-person views held by the johnclarkian collections of atoms, so you > can make sense of what he is saying. > You just said and I agree that there are "two first-person views", and both people who have those two different first person views remember being the Helsinki man; so those talking about "THE" future first person view of the Helsinki Man as if it were singular are talking nonsense. As for "ridiculing the terminology" well...., from now on I promise to give it all the respect it deserves. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
