From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@ricochet.net)
Date: Tue May 29 2001 - 22:23:00 MDT
Samantha Atkins wrote very well about what progress means to
her. I empathize and agree. Now as to whether to remain the
same person over time, I am unclear whether this is a terminological
difference, or an important difference.
>I haven't any great desire to stay the same person for very
>long. What on earth (or off it) for? Change is intensely
>fun. Do I mourn the fetus I used to be or it me? Of course
>not!
I do have a desire to remain the same person forever. I enjoy
being me, and have not especially enjoyed being other people.
(If, of course, you are using "becoming a different person" as
a metaphor for rich development, that's different. But I think
that it confounds important issues.)
Would you or would you not mind evolving into someone that has
absolutely no resemblance to Samantha Atkins circa 2001? If
you don't mind, then you might as well evolve into Lee Corbin.
That way, I'd get twice as much runtime, and you (so you think)
wouldn't lose anything.
But the fact is that if you do evolve into someone else entirely,
then you're not alive anymore. (Why is it that I'm always
reminding people of tautologies? E.g., being alive is better
than being dead. Honestly, it really does seem necessary!)
>Change is not death, it is change. It is growth/transformation.
>Being ossified on one form in the flow of being and becoming is
>much more deadly.
No argument there, although it depends on how much change
you are permitting under "ossification".
If you were to adopt my scheme
>> The solution: run multiple copies of yourself in the background
>> from each stage of your development. Anticipate being all those
>> who are not too advanced. Leave it to the slightly more advanced
>> versions of yourself to try to identify with those that are
>> extremely advanced, because you won't be able to.
would the Samantha Atkins that never entirely evolves away from
the 2001 version become restless, or bored, or upset? Would she
feel bored or trapped? Do you think that there are only a limited
number of things to be interested in or to do with an I.Q. of 250
and all the wealth and time in the world?
Lee Corbin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:50 MST