From: den Otter (otter@globalxs.nl)
Date: Mon Sep 15 1997 - 15:05:45 MDT
----------
>Berrie Staring <staring@worldonline.nl> wrote:
> > > Anyone an opinion.
> > Apparently we agree after all on your original question (does a copy
> > know he's been copied---> probably not). Now there's this tricky ID
> > thing: is a non-connected copy of any use to "the original"...???
>
> Still: if the copy is PERFECT at the absolute NO-brain-activity-point.
> The copy is You. If not, you have to believe in some sort of magical
> spirit called "you". This is exactly my problem point, when both
> become active again: who is who ?
Actually, I think *you* must belief in some sort of "magical spirit" that
moves from your old neural net to the new (virtual) one so it can become
"you" (instead of just a "perfect" *copy* that *thinks* he's you). Unless
the old "you" and the new "you" are directly and thoroughly connected
they aren't the same person. See also Geoff Smith's excellent posting
on this issue.
> Greetings,
DdO
*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
Non gratum anus rodentum
*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:54 MST