Re: Survival of identity

From: Jef Allbright (jef@jefallbright.net)
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 09:04:58 MST


Hey gts, lest my post be too closely associated with your addendum, I would
like to add the following statements:

I certainly do not "object" to Lee's ideas. On the contrary, I would
encourage them. However I do disagree with at least one of his current
points, and that's what makes it interesting. (I realize you probably
didn't mean "object" in quite that same sense, but I want to be clear about
that.)

One of the reasons I continue to subscribe to the Extropy list is that as I
sift through it I continue to find jewels of thought to add to my growing
collection. Let's encourage differences of opinion, and encourage their
expression in as *rational* and *respectful* a forum as we can manage.

- Jef

gts wrote:
> Again I find myself in complete agreement with your
> objections to Lee's ideas, Jef, so much so that I
> hesitate to respond lest I give a different
> impression. However I'd like to to elaborate further
> on your message:
> ...
> It would be a crime against reason to assume that
> other person to be me. And yet here we have Lee
> Corbin, who claims with apparent sincerity that after
> "thirty years" of research he has concluded that such
> branched versions of ourselves should be considered
> identical to self. Such rot.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:49 MST