From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Nov 02 2002 - 12:29:37 MST
Robert writes
> Cool, a scale one can place oneself on (I've been ignoring this conversation)
> ....
Thanks, yes, I just need to put level 5 before 3 and 4 as pointed out recently.
> [snip]
>
> > 7. Logically, but not necessarily emotionally, anticipates all
> > experiences of all duplicates past or future, near or far.
>
> I really doubt that it is possible to anticipate *all* experiences.
> I'm sure most of us would choose to integrate in any and all "nice"
> experiences of our clones and tend to filter any "bad" experiences.
Yeah, it would be pretty super-human. Actually, a few people
do manage to resist all torture, clinging to principle. But
I, for one, would crack and call down far worse on my duplicate
after a few twists of the rack.
Moreover, nature designed us not to anticipate things that
happened to us in the past for a very good reason: since
this does not affect the future, there is no point, biologically
speaking. I hope to introduce, shortly, a discussion of how
Newcomb's paradox comes to play in identity discussions, but
they've never reached sufficient depth previously (IMO---that
is, there never were enough people who at least were somewhat
favorable to level seven).
> I have no doubt that my clones may have some bad experiences.
> Such is life! But *I* don't want them in my experiential framework
> other than from the perspective of life threatening situations that
> I should avoid (i.e. abstractions).
Yes, when it's time to merge then there are some memories
best not included. Although it's practically unreadable,
"Kiln People" by David Brin discusses this in detail.
But also, while we do want to eschew brutal pain reminders
of wrong choices and rely instead on abstractions ("don't
step on thorny areas with bare feet", "avoid touching
hot stoves with unexposed skin", and so on, we do have to
remember that some unconscious learning is also good.
> So one has some interesting reintegration criteria. *Don't* give
> me the raw unprocessed experiences (yes, I know my clones had them
> but I don't want them) -- instead give me the conclusions they would
> have reached had they survived such experiences. (Actually the
> conclusions they might reach not having survived such experiences
> might be more useful.)
Quite right.
> Here is an interesting question regarding forking, etc.
>
> Do you trust yourself?
Very perceptive question. I was shocked when my father said
that he wouldn't get along with himself, and I wonder if he
could have trusted himself.
As for me, I would trust myself above all other human beings
I have ever known. Perhaps because the identity paradox has
become second nature to me after so many years, I would never
defect against a duplicate. My self is one of the very last
people I want to come to harm.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:57:55 MST