Sincere Questions on Identity

From: Smigrodzki, Rafal (SmigrodzkiR@MSX.UPMC.EDU)
Date: Fri Dec 14 2001 - 14:33:24 MST


From: "Jacques Du Pasquier" <jacques@dtext.com>

The second is distinction between distinct objects, possibly similar
(and in fact possibly, at least in theory, identical), which is
somewhere in the very basic layers of common sense --- and routinely
used in science, too, of course.

### This distinction is irrelevant to our discussion - I do know that my
copy is a distinct physical object, not identical to myself, but for the
purposes of my survival this copy is as good (a subjective value statement)
as myself, just like a quarter is as good any other quarter for the purpose
of buying a can of Coke.

----
Will you, once "shuffled", deny that one is the
one we had named missile A, and the other the one we had called
missile B, whether you can now tell or not ?
### They are different but it's irrelevant for me (might be important for
you - a value judgement).
----
 Proper names like "Lee Daniel Crocker"
designate a singular entity, not a class, not a design. It is not a
common name, it is not an abstraction. 
### I do hope that when copying technology is perfected I will multiply to
hundreds or thousands of copies. Each one of me will be able to offer my
professional services as "Rafal M. Smigrodzki, copy# XXXX". My proper name
will stop being a name used to describe the 154 lb of flesh where I am
housed now - it will be a brand name for all of me. Employers will hire
them, maybe saying, "Let's get a few Rafals and a couple Lee Daniel
Crockers, they seem to work well together".
-----
 If you introduce the "you/me" pronoun, and the fictional
unity that this imply, then you must say that YOU ARE THAT LUMP OF
MATTER.
### No, I am not - I am an information processing pattern housed currently
in that lump of flesh. I am software. You might construe your own identity
as hardware - it's a personal value judgement.
----
But what you are now is just THAT lump of matter, and if it gets back
to dust, you get back to dust, because you are nothing else than that.
### This is incorrect - if you ask any lump of matter physically identical
to my current lump of matter, you will hear the answer that it is an
embodiment of me, and I will of course agree with it - and I am the only
person with the authority to answer this subjective question, by my
definition of self. If your definition of your own self is built
differently, your views pertain only to yourself, never to me.
I still hope that if I use the mantra "personal value judgement", or "a
matter of taste", I will be finally able to convince people not to try to
force me to accept their "objective" ideas of what is me, R.M. Smigrodzki.
Rafal


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:33 MST