From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Oct 30 2002 - 12:27:46 MST
By the way, Dan, my answer to you below is also an excellent illustration of
my argument that self/personality/identity changes continuously. To my way
of thinking there is no difference, philosophically, between the suicidal
repeat-copy serial murderer you describe and a conventional serial murderer.
A conventional serial murderer's personality "suicides" and is reborn in
slightly different form with each passing moment.
-gts
----- Original Message -----
From: "gts" <gts@optexinc.com>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: The nature of obligation
> Dan Fabulich wrote:
>
> > gts wrote:
>
> > > Similarly, a fork "born" of legal age would decide for himself whether
> > > or not to do your bidding. If you coerced him to act unlawfully then
you
> > > would be guilty of extortion or worse.
> >
> > It would be no coercion. Imagine an insane serial murderer who made a
> > copy of himself whenever he intended to kill someone; he'd kill his
> > victim, then kill himself.
>
> I don't see how this would result in an increase in the murder rate.
> Statistically the situation would be identical to that of catching a
serial
> murderer who did not suicide after each murder. And it would be easier to
> apprehend such an insane murder-suicide killer because we would know
exactly
> what he looked like.
>
> The only difference might be in how we investigate and prosecute: unless
we
> caught a copy in the act of murder before he suicided, we would be forced
to
> gather evidence and charge the apprehended copy with intent to commit
murder
> (since only his past suicided copies actually commited murders). The laws
> would simply need be modified to make the penalty for such a serial murder
> scheme as stiff as they are for conventional cases of serial murder. The
> last copy would hang.
>
> -gts
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:53 MST