On 10/3/2015 11:32 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 3 Oct 2015, at 5:02 PM, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10/2/2015 8:52 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Remote copies are still copies. If a copy of you were made in the Andromeda
Galaxy a billion years hence, it would still *by definition* think it was you
despite being made of different matter, despite it being far removed in space
and time, despite it possibly having no physical connection with you.
Yes, it would think so, but would it be right? In what sense is it possible to
right?
I don't think the difficulty of verification invalidates the point I am making.
A sceptical challenge could be mounted in everyday life - we could have false
memories and false beliefs about ourselves.
But we check those against the consistency of our environment, physics
and our friends - which I think is the crux of Bruce's idea that you
have to reproduce a big chunk of the surrounding world in order to get
the kind of continuity you need.
Brent
If it is meaningful in any sense to say that psychological continuity is
possible, it is meaningful to say that it is possible across worlds that cannot
communicate.
--
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.
