From: Damien Broderick (d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Thu Dec 07 2000 - 20:59:56 MST
At 01:12 AM 8/12/00 +0100, "scerir" <scerir@libero.it> wrote:
><.................a copy is not the original.....................>
>
>That's because a perfect cloning machine
>can not exist [*].
>
>And that is the proof of
>the existence of human soul......
>
>[*] W.K. Wooters, W.H. Zurek: Nature, 299, 802, (1982)
No. At best, it's proof of human uniqueness (a moral/political lesson Peter
Medawar drew decades ago from immunological specificity).
And I do wish people would stop using the term `clone' to mean `exact
duplicate', which a clone isn't. The convenient >H term is `xox' (from
`xerox').
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:15 MST