From: Zero Powers (zero_powers@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri May 05 2000 - 22:41:42 MDT
>From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.com
>To: <extropians@extropy.com>
>Subject: Re: Can I kill a Copy? (long)
>Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:01:12 -0400
>
>A copy of "Eugene Leitl" <eugene.leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> wrote on
>Friday,
>May 05, 2000 7:15 AM,
>
> > Zero Powers writes:
> > > Killing a sentient being, whether an identical twin, an exact replica
>of you
> >
> > An exact replica of you (you do realize what that means, don't you?)
> > is you. This means, there are two instances of you, both being in the
> > exact the same state. As long as they don't bifurcate, I don't see why
> > you can't delete one of them.
>To put my own
>semantic spin on things, you are interrupting the process of creating a
>copy
>and not finishing the final step of giving it consciousness. Until that
>final step, it is not yet alive. It is an inert clone of spare parts that
>has not been animated.
Hmm. I had not considered that. If that is what Eugene had in mind, I
don't suppose I could argue with that. I find it difficult to imagine a
replica of me that is exact in every way, yet still not having
consciousness. But if it could somehow be done, and the copy was terminated
before the last step of igniting the consciousness, then moral
ly I don't suppose I'd have a problem with that. Although I still believe
that would raise a sticky *ethical* issue.
-Zero
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
--Thomas Jefferson
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:28:26 MST