From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sun Jun 03 2001 - 03:05:22 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote,
> Harvey Newstrom provides four aspects of why he (one copy)
> is not him (the other copy). Paraphrased, they are
>
> 1. I have control over my own body and mind.
> 2. The duplicate body sitting next to me is not under my control.
> 3. From my vantage point the (other) duplicate is evidently
> being controlled by a consciousness different from mine.
> 4. Tomorrow, "my" body tomorrow is still under "my" control.
> Now first, I think that you'll agree that all four of your
> reasons depend heavily on exactly what is meant by "I" and
> "me". You may even readily admit that under a somewhat
> broader concept of "I" and "me", they are no longer true.
Yes. I agree that if you redefine my words to mean different things than I
meant them to mean, that we would come to a different conclusion that I
originally came to.
So let me rephrase without using the disputed words.
1. Some entity has the ability to control a body called Harvey Newstrom
using mental signals.
2. After duplicating the body called Harvey Newstrom there will be two
identical bodies called Harvey Newstrom. Any entity controlling Harvey
Newstrom can only affect one body with mental commands. Such an entity
cannot control any other body called Harvey Newstrom.
3. Other bodies named Harvey Newstrom will appear to be under some sort of
control. They will act as if they are under the control of other similar or
exact entities as any other body named Harvey Newstrom. However, the
nonsynchronized behavior of these bodies would indicate that they are not
being controlled by the same entity as one another.
4. The body being controlled by any entity will always remain the same.
Control of a body will not jump randomly between bodies to another body.
Each entity will only receive sensory input from the body it controls. It
will only create new memories for events experienced by that body. Only
that body will respond to mental commands. These sensory inputs, new
memories and control processes will always stay together and will remain
consistently connected to a single body.
As an example, an entity can make one body clap its hands. It cannot make
two bodies clap their hands together. The only way to make this happen is
to make its body request that the other body clap its hand against the hand
of the controlled body. The other body may or may not cooperate. Even if
it does cooperate, the clapping is not synchronized very well and the hands
may not come together at the same time or in the same place. The other hand
will not stop clapping at the same time as the controlled hand either.
There will clearly be a lack of control or feedback for more than one body.
Any entity trying to control the bodies will only be able to control one of
them.
-- 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