From: Mike Dougherty (msd001@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 08 2009 - 21:54:21 MDT
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp@gmail.com>wrote:
> 2009/3/9 Mike Dougherty <msd001@gmail.com>:
>
> > I understood Matt's original position that we would choose A (with the
> > caveat that there is no lasting inexplicable physical damage) because the
> > consciousness with no memory of the experience is indistinguishable from
> > having not had the experience at all. A memory of fading intensity is
> still
> > much more traumatic than no memory.
>
> Removing the memory does not make the experience benign. If it did, no
> experience would matter since we are all in the end demented or dead.
>
granted. But the point is about identity continuity around events or the
lack of memory of events.
For all the upload and teleport philosophical devices, I don't think this is
much different than if I were to get you so stupidly drunk that you had no
recollection of events at last night's party. If I told you that you did
XYZ heinous or embarrassing things, would you trust me and act accordingly?
What if I provided pictures? What if those pictures were expertly
photoshopped? Do you see how this might become a problem in a world where
memory is as easily constructed/manipulated as photoshopped images?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT