Re: Conventional QTI = False

Saibal writes: > According to the conventional QTI, not only do you live forever, you can > also never forget anything. I don't believe this because I know for a > fact that I have forgotten quite a lot of things that have happened a > long time ago. Right, but to make the same argument against

Re: fin insanity

Charles Goodwin wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > As I have written before, a person is just a computation being implemented > > somewhere. Suppose that the person has discovered that he suffers from a > > terminal ilness and he dies

Re: FIN too

Fred Chen wrote: >Hal, Charles, I think this is an unavoidable part of the QTI or FIN debate. >It seems that with QTI, you could only be entering white rabbit >(magical-type) universes, not continue in probable ones. > >But in general I have a more fundamental objection (to quantum > immortality)

Conventional QTI = False

According to the conventional QTI, not only do you live forever, you can also never forget anything. I don't believe  this because I know for a fact that I have forgotten quite a lot of things that have happened a long time ago.   Saibal  

RE: Conditional probability & continuity of consciousness (was:

Jesse Mazer wrote: >I don't really think there's some "other metaphysical realm" where we get >dropped from, but I do think that, as an analogy, the spotlight one is not >actually so bad. After all, if you think that you just *are* your current >observer-moment, how can you possibly become any