From: J. R. Molloy (jr@shasta.com)
Date: Mon Jul 23 2001 - 13:32:04 MDT
From: "Eugene Leitl" <Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de>
> Does this mean your severed head on life support is not you?
Think about it. __Whose__ severed head would it be?
> Or, with less drama, if you went paragliding, and fractured your C6
> vertebra, thus severing any direct (anything hormonal would lack the
> bandwidth) neural connection to your "second brain", you'd become someone
> else?
You know better than that.
> (I don't disagree that you need as much context as can get, but as you
> well know, a whole body is not only more expensive than a neuro, but is
> also paid by a neuro of less quality. Given that you *know* there is some
> heavy information erasure going on in your noggin while it is being
> neuropreserved, are you really willing to risk more brain damage for a
> very dubious hypothesis?).
Definitely not! I'd sooner invest in Eliezer's neighborly golem than in
neuropreservation.
> How much braindamage would you be willing to tolerate for perserving your
> appendix?
Well, obviously the appendix is an entirely different matter, since it is
completely expendable.
©¿©¬
--J. R.
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, and ego.
Everything that can happen has already happened, not just once,
but an infinite number of times, and will continue to do so forever.
(Everything that can happen = more than anyone can imagine.)
We won't move into a better future until we debunk religiosity, the most
regressive force now operating in society.
http://www.kartoo.com/cgi-bin/k.cgi?q=virtropy&l=0&m=1
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:04 MST