From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Oct 12 2002 - 08:47:22 MDT
On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Damien Broderick wrote:
> Robert, you're still sidestepping what I consider the important issue:
> namely, what is at stake for the original.
Ah, but if I didn't sidestep the issue then I wouldn't get you
come up with such a creative response.
> Unless everyone concerned has agreed to accept the
> Emlyn Undecidability Principle, in which case the matter is forever moot.
That's great. We can now have the EUP cast in bronze for the archives.
> Traditional evidence for the Emlyn Principle is that very few of us fear
> extinction during sleep or medical unconsciousness; adducing the continuity
> of the body is a rather clinical afterthought since *I*, having been
> unconscious, can only know that continuity via the fallible testimony of
> others.
Which is rather interesting -- since "others" would not be able
to tell Damien 0.0 from the Damien 1.0 xox.
This leads to the question of whether some (or most) people would
object if they were painlessly excised from reality in their sleep
tonight and were replaced by an indistinguishable xox tomorrow.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:30 MST