2009/2/11 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
But the same could be said about everyday life. The person who wakes
up in my bed tomorrow won't be me, he will be some guy who thinks he's
me and shares my memories, personality traits, physical
characteristics and so on. In other words,
--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
2) If the data saved to the disk is only based on A1 (e.g. discarding
any errors that A2 might have made) then one could say that A1 is the
same person as B, while A2 is not. This is causal differentiation.
Yes, but
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/2/11 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
But the same could be said about everyday life. The person who wakes
up in my bed tomorrow won't be me, he will be some guy who thinks he's
me and shares my memories, personality traits, physical
characteristics and
2009/2/12 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
If continuity is fundamental then personal identity could be defined in terms
of
it and there could be a real difference between you and someone with the same
memories, but without continuity to your past.
But that could lead to absurd
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/2/12 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
If continuity is fundamental then personal identity could be defined in
terms of
it and there could be a real difference between you and someone with the same
memories, but without continuity to your past.
But
--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/2/11 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com:
2) If the data saved to the disk is only based on A1
(e.g. discarding any errors that A2 might have made) then
one could say that A1 is the same person as B, while A2 is
not.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 07:07:50PM -0800, Jack Mallah wrote:
That actually doesn't matter - causation is defined in terms of
counterfactuals. If - then, considering what happens at that moment of
saving the data. If x=1 and y=1, and I copy the contents of x to z, that is
not the same
Jack Mallah wrote:
--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/2/11 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com:
2) If the data saved to the disk is only based on A1
(e.g. discarding any errors that A2 might have made) then
one could say that A1 is the same person as B,
2009/2/11 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com:
3) If I am defined as an observer-moment, then I am
part of either A1 or A2, not even the whole thing - just my
current experience. This is the most conservative
definition and thus may be the least misleading.
This is the way I think of it,
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/2/11 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com:
3) If I am defined as an observer-moment, then I am
part of either A1 or A2, not even the whole thing - just my
current experience. This is the most conservative
definition and thus may be the least misleading.
This
10 matches
Mail list logo
