On 4 October 2015 at 07:31, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 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. Not really. If you unexpectedly found yourself in a weird environment, floating in a bubble in space with no recollection of how you got there for example, I think you would become anxious, theorise about how you might have got there and what might happen next, and so on. I can't imagine that your first thought would be that, with most normal environmental cues gone, you would forget who you were. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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.
