From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sun Jun 03 2001 - 03:07:06 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote,
> I have to convince you that this latter formulation of what
> "I" am---or what a person is---is better for us to adopt.
> With the wider definition, you can see that your 2 and 3
> are patently untrue: the consciousness (objectively speaking)
> is not different, it is the same as yours.
I do not dispute the definition of a person or that the different entities
are the same. They are the same in the sense that they are all identical.
They are not a single entity. They are separately running system, each
operating with a separate input data stream, output command stream, physical
body control, and memory database since the creation of the bodies. There
is nothing shared between these entities. They may be dressed in matching
clothes, wear matching nametags and even look alike, but they are not
sharing physical bodies, mental memories, conscious controls or any other
resources of a person with the other entities.
> next to you is under "your" control, where "your" now has
> this more objective meaning. (Yes; it is rather counter-
> intuitive.)
Yes, if you redefine the words "my control" to mean "Harvey Newstrom
controller", then yes I would have to agree that all the bodies are under
"Harvey Newstrom control". However, the "Harvey Newstrom" that controls one
body does not know what the "Harvey Newstrom" controlling the other body is
doing. One "Harvey Newstrom" may direct its body to do different things
than the other "Harvey Newstrom".
If you insist on this gestalt meaning, claiming that all the bodies are
controlled by a single consciousness, then I must tell you that this single
consciousness has a split personality. Each personality only controls one
body. Information given to one body can never be expressed or acknowledged
by the other body. One part of this mind is not communicating with the
other part of this mind.
If you whisper in one's ear, the other body cannot answer. If you stab one
body with a knife, the other body cannot scream in pain. If you show an
image to one body, the other body cannot perceive it. If one thinks of a
number between one and a million, the other cannot guess it.
These entities will have no more connection to each other than twins,
siblings, relatives or even nonrelated people do to each other. By simple
counting processes of determining how many entities there are, we would have
to count them separately. If we decide that difference pieces of "one"
entity do not have to communicate or even be aware of each other, we might
as well define everybody in the universe as being "one" cosmic mind, and be
done with it.
-- Harvey Newstrom <http://HarveyNewstrom.com> <http://Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:55 MST