From: John Clark (jonkc@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Sun Jun 03 2001 - 09:12:30 MDT
Harvey Newstrom <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com> Wrote:
>It seems to be that your definition of self is too rigid if it does not
>allow you to change.
I don't have a definition of self, I don't have a definition for any or the really
important things in life, I just have examples. In looking back on the two
year old John K Clark I feel no sense of loss, even though I have almost
nothing in common with that stupid screaming brat. The transition didn't bother
me, so I don't see why the transition to Transhuman would bother me either.
If you want to interpret that to mean that the two year John K Clark is dead then
that's fine with me, it would just mean that death is not all it's cracked up to be.
>Is this why you are so intent of scenarios where copies are exact down to
>the last atom, and only appear in symmetrical rooms that are identical?
Nope, just trying to simplify a thought experiment, I wanted to introduce a situation
where it's impossible to tell if you're the "copy" or the "original" and no reason to care.
>Are you really that sure that a single atom of change destroys your identity?
If I did think that then I'd also think that identity did not exist because we are always
in a constant state of flux. Not being the resident of a mental institution I do not think this.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:55 MST