From: Emlyn (emlyn@one.net.au)
Date: Mon Dec 11 2000 - 02:53:50 MST
There is a line of argument in this "consciousness" debate, which sometimes
becomes explicit, which is this:
"Consciousness doesn't matter; it probably doesn't even exist. There is no
consciousness, so no problem of consciousness."
This is an appealing argument, because it steps around some pretty major
technical difficulties.
But it begs the question, that if consciousness isn't, and a copy is the
original in all functional senses, then what is the point of uploading, or a
quest for immortality, or anything, really?
If you personally want to be immortal (or indefinitely long lived, anyway),
you are making a statement about yourself. If consciousness isn't, if your
self isn't, then what is it that you are trying to preserve? Your
description? A state of the universe where some being traceable back to your
original DNA is alive? Why?
If there is no self, what is the motivation to defeat death, on a personal
level, and continue? Why is personal preservation more important than, for
instance, the preservation of the species? Why wouldn't you support research
which would create DNA for an indefinitely lived next generation, rather
than uploading, where you are trying to preserve the current generation?
Isn't the quest to make future generations long lived far easier to attain
than that to preserve existing (and crumbling) phenotypes?
Dennetites, who are also for life extension, what is your motivation?
Emlyn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:18 MST