I have a t-shirt with a cockroach on it. Captioned beneath: "I woke up like 
this." 

I wear it when I do laundry or when I don't give a fuck. 

On Monday, July 22, 2019 at 5:55:47 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 6:35 AM Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 21:49, Bruce Kellett <[email protected] 
>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:37 PM Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected] 
>>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 14:12, Bruce Kellett <[email protected] 
>>>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 9:55 PM Bruno Marchal <[email protected] 
>>>>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21 Jul 2019, at 08:11, Dan Sonik <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or, if you don’t die, the only way to avoid the indeterminacy is by 
>>>>>>> claiming that you will feel to be at both city at once, but that will 
>>>>>>> need 
>>>>>>> some telepathy hardly compatible with the idea that the level of 
>>>>>>> substitution was correctly chosen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, do you die or not in the step 3?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know -- build a DDTR machine from all that great math and 
>>>>>> let's find out -- you go first.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me rephrase the question:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Assuming digital mechanism (YD + CT) do you die in the step 3?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> According to the protocol, you are scanned, and then the original is 
>>>>> cut. The scanned data is then reconstituted; locally, or after a delay, 
>>>>> or 
>>>>> in several different places.
>>>>>
>>>>> The simplest interpretation of the "cut" phase is that the original 
>>>>> disappears, i.e., dies. If you take a slightly more sophisticated view of 
>>>>> personal identity, depending on a lot more the just memories of previous 
>>>>> states, but depending also on bodily continuity, then the question of 
>>>>> whether the original dies or not depends on the details of your theory of 
>>>>> personal identity. For example, in Nozik's "closest continuer" theory, if 
>>>>> the duplicate has an equivalent body and environment, then a single 
>>>>> continuer is the closest continuer of the original, and can be considered 
>>>>> the same person in some sense. Nozik's argument is that if there are two 
>>>>> or 
>>>>> more continuers, and there is a tie in the relevant sense of "closeness", 
>>>>> then each continuer is a new person, and the original no longer exists 
>>>>> (dies).
>>>>>
>>>>> So, as Dan points out, there is a lot more to this scenario than your 
>>>>> simplistic assumptions allow:  it is actually an empirical question as to 
>>>>> whether the "person" continues unaltered or not. So rather than armchair 
>>>>> philosophising, we should wait until the relevant brain scans are indeed 
>>>>> possible and we perform the experiment, before we pontificate absolutely 
>>>>> on 
>>>>> what will or will not happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for assuming digital mechanism (YD + CT), it is not a matter of 
>>>>> assuming this. It is a matter of whether the assumptions that you are 
>>>>> building in make sense or not. And that is an empirical matter. Does any 
>>>>> of 
>>>>> it comport with our usual understandings of personal identity and other 
>>>>> matters.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What evidence do you think “the relevant brain scans” could provide 
>>>> that might have any bearing on the question of personal identity?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Brain scans might have some bearing on whether not your brain can be 
>>> replaced by some equivalent digital device. Once you can do this, questions 
>>> about personal identity become an empirical matter, as has been pointed out 
>>> several times.
>>>
>>
>> The substantive problem is a philosophical one, since by assumption in 
>> these debates the copied brain is identical by any empirical test.
>>
>
>  I am reminded of Kafka's novella, 'Metamorphosis': "When Gregor Samsa 
> awoke one morning from troubled dreams, he found himself changed into a 
> monstrous cockroach in his bed."......
>
> Is the person just the brain, or is there more to it?
>
> Bruce
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/372ed6cb-c60a-4f18-9aac-e95cb868cfb9%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to