From: Sean Hastings (whysean@earthlnk.net)
Date: Tue Aug 27 1996 - 14:07:48 MDT
Max More wrote:
>Of course I'm not
>particularly interested in living on through my genes (although I'd take
>that option if it were the *only* one). While I want my memes, or some of
>them, or those that survive critical testing, to live on, I'm vastly more
>interested in *me* living on.
>I am not my memes. I have ideas, as well as memories, dispositions, values,
>and so on, but it's *me* -- the active, choosing being that I want to
>survive and flourish, not primarily some ideas that I have.
You’re not a closet dualist are you Max? I don’t see how you can be
after
having read your Ph.D. philosophy dissertation on personal identity.
If not, then what is this *me* but a self referential memetic label
pointing
to a selected set of information on both the genetic and memetic levels?
I like Anders’ analogy that my current memetic structure might someday
form
the “brain stem” of an SI. I find it far more comforting than the idea
that my
memetic structure will simply be data to which an SI has access. Both
represent immortality if all the info. is there, the first option just
seems
more like *me* living.
--Sean
--E-mail: mailto:whysean@earthlink.net
--V-mail: (504)825-1232 or (800)WHY-SEAN
--S-mail: 5500 Prytania St. #414/New Orleans, LA/70115
--U.R.L.: http://home.earthlink.net/~whysean
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:43 MST