From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 22:52:46 MST
"Dickey, Michael F" <michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com>
> the pattern, which is identical to the reference pattern, and is
> imprinted upon a new group of atoms, is not a subjective
> continuation of the reference pattern. That is, it is not you.
>The evidence I have for the fact that the same pattern in a
>different group of atoms is that if we were to copy the
> pattern and imprint it into a new group of atoms the new
>group/pattern will be identical to the reference, but would
>not experience the same subjective events as the reference
You must get paid by the word, I will say the same thing more concisely:
"The evidence the subjective experience is not the same is that the
subjective experience is not the same."
I must say I'm not entirely convinced.
I also think trying to find an exact definition of survival and death is
pointless, like most things we learn the meaning of those words from
example not definition. Whatever I mean when I say "John Clark did
not die yesterday" I will mean the same thing tomorrow if I'm lucky
enough to be able to say it tomorrow. If your criteria for survival is so
onerous that you can't even be sure you've survived right now then
what's the point? As for me, I think I've survived so I have and if my
"copy" thinks I've survived then I have.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:51 MST