Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[malloc]

You can argue that you are not even the same person for more than a few nano seconds at the time. Your chemistry changes, both in your body, but also in your brain. Atoms swap places, electrons change configuration, energy states change. Everything changes.

You could even argue that overnight if you got down to the physical level, most of you have changed. The self of you that started reading my post, might as well have ceased to exist. Never caring that he does not exist anymore.

Statistically you only keep a very small fraction of the atoms you start out with. But honestly it does not mean anything, because consciousness is a funny thing. It does not care about whether or not it's the same. It's almost like a string of code being executed by a computer. You can suspend the execution, and you can wake it up at any time. If non of the memory have changed state, the code will execute as if nothing has happened. While the comparison is a bit rough, I mean, I know you can make code that checks for just about anything at runtime, but the basic idea is more or less the same.

If we ever make a teleporter, or, in other words something which can create an exact replica of ourselves somewhere else. The new entity will never know it ceased exist, and honestly it won't matter. Unless you begin speaking philosophically about how the original version of yourself technically dies.

But IF we ever do make a machine that can send a data about our exact atomic configuration, over long distances and actually reconstruct us.
Then please explain to me why we would ever have to destroy the original? It seems like a waste to me. Honestly, the only difference will be that we will have to start getting used to the thought that we as living and sentient beings are not unique or special, but we consist of a bunch of chemical matter that could be decoded into information, and reassembled, like some blueprints for any other complex being.

Also, such technology would have FAR greater uses than simple transportation. We could potentially live forever with such technology. Live out one body, and get recreated in a new body with the memories of your old self.

To be honest I hope that we find better solutions for instantaneous travel.

[Skyrunner]

Yeah, another bad thing is that we can never prove whether or not our consciousness is continued or not... because the 'copy' (or not) will think that he is the same.

[Ehndras]

*SIGH*

Just read the entire thread.

If you believe only in physical consciousness, then by assumption based on current scientific thought, you must believe that the new copy of yourself will manifest consciousness as perfectly as yours, exactly, as in a flawless mirror image. See how many synonyms of 'same' I put in there?

If you believe in the soul, then most likely the soul would be transported along with its vessel, as it must capture matter AND energy, and your soul would be transported to the new host as well.



In other news, it makes me cringe to watch people debate a subject none of them know absolute jack shit about. Lets debate genetic manipulation or electrical engineering, but PLEASE don't argue over a topic where you have absolutely no idea what the fuck you're talking about, nor does anyone else really.

If I wanted inane verbal flailing I'd watch a multi-church debate on the identity of god. Jesus Christ, nevermind, I don't even watch to picture that horror story.

[Max White]

It's no different from if you made an exact copy and then put a bullet through your own head. Your mind wouldn't jump to the other one. It'd be splattered all over the wall.

It is totally different! There is a lot less mess to clean up.
I think people get a little too superstitious about their sense of self... 'Your' mind, as in everything that makes your mind unique, would be copied over.

It's like if I had a CD, copied it over to form a second CD with the exact content, then smashed the first. Yes, I am breaking a CD, but nothing of value is lost, even if that CD had some very valuable data on it.

[Skyrunner]

~snip

Thank you for your helpful contribution.

*

[GlyphGryph]

It's no different from if you made an exact copy and then put a bullet through your own head. Your mind wouldn't jump to the other one. It'd be splattered all over the wall.

Yes but if you make another one, then you've got two copies of your mind (the "original" and the newly minted one). So "your" mind would both be splattered over the wall, AND safely nestled in another body.

Your mind is in both, because there's two of you - there's no jumping, and obviously every bit after creation is unique, but... You'd have two "instances" of "you" - you'd have two "minds".

Again, think of software, the one thing we can sort of do this with. If I create a copy of my DF save data after playing my turn in our succession fort, are you playing in the "same" world? Yes! If I choose to play my copy of the world while you play yours, they will then /diverge/, but up until that point they were two separate instances of the same world.

Are we both using the same forum? Or "merely" using different copies of the forum? Am I reading your words, or am I "merely" reading copies of your words?

I guess in the end it depends on whether or not you see "original"ness as something defined by the physical expression or something based on how the physical expression functions. I believe I am seeing your "original" words, because they are unedited, even though they are, technically, just a copy. Of course, it would be hard to argue there ever was an original post at all.

Correction: A perfect copy remains.

No matter which one you shoot, a perfect copy remains. Well, maybe not so perfect anymore, since it will have diverged during the time it took to shoot, but close enough.

[darkrider2]

Lets debate genetic manipulation or electrical engineering, but PLEASE don't argue over a topic where you have absolutely no idea what the fuck you're talking about, nor does anyone else really.

How about zombies?

[GlyphGryph]

p-zombies?

[Skyrunner]

Zombie computers?

[DeKaFu]

It's like if I had a CD, copied it over to form a second CD with the exact content, then smashed the first. Yes, I am breaking a CD, but nothing of value is lost, even if that CD had some very valuable data on it.

The data on the disc is not you, though. It'd be better to say that you are a single execution of a program. Even if the program remains, your perception of the world ends as soon as the program ends. Copying the program onto a disc does nothing to save you, because the next time it runs it'll be a new execution and not you.

Edit: I suspect I might be bad at metaphors. But I think our point of difference is that I consider myself to be not only the sum of my personality and memories, but also my innate ability to percieve the world and differentiate myself from it. The first is easily preserved via teleportation, the second is not portable. It's not a soul - it's the fact that each copy of a thing is inherently separate.

[Tarran]

If you believe only in physical consciousness, then by assumption based on current scientific thought, you must believe that the new copy of yourself will manifest consciousness as perfectly as yours, exactly, as in a flawless mirror image. See how many synonyms of 'same' I put in there?

If you believe in the soul, then most likely the soul would be transported along with its vessel, as it must capture matter AND energy, and your soul would be transported to the new host as well.

You're putting in two extremes.

Can people not believe of something in-between?

In other news, it makes me cringe to watch people debate a subject none of them know absolute jack shit about. Lets debate genetic manipulation or electrical engineering, but PLEASE don't argue over a topic where you have absolutely no idea what the fuck you're talking about, nor does anyone else really.

Calm your jets. Really. Sit down and calm down. It's better on yourself to stay calm.

Now, if it makes you cringe, why did you even read the thread?

It's like if I had a CD, copied it over to form a second CD with the exact content, then smashed the first. Yes, I am breaking a CD, but nothing of value is lost, even if that CD had some very valuable data on it.

It's not about the data on the disk, it's about which one is the original that had that data.

Similarly, it's not about what gets copied or not on a teleporter, it's about the original person who stepped on the teleporter.

[GlyphGryph]

DeKaFu - That's where our difference lies then. Those who see ourselves as the program - the some of experiences, the beliefs, the ideals, the memories, the maps and the quirks that make us up - and those, like yourself and Tarran, who see us as the physical, running instance.

You seem to believe, for example, that so long as we remained alive we could suffer severe brain trauma and total amnesia and still be "us", while I don't think that's true at all.

Ultimately, though, "You"? "Original"? "Copy"? None of what your arguing actually matters if you're not able to say why those attributes that define an instance are /important/. If you can't do that, even if you win the language wars here, the impact is minimal.

So the question is - Why does it matter if its a new instance of us or not, if its got everything we do? If we're destroyed, what of value is actually lost, and why is it valuable?

[Max White]

The data on the disc is not you, though. It'd be better to say that you are a single execution of a program. Even if the program remains, your perception of the world ends as soon as the program ends. Copying the program onto a disc does nothing to save you, because the next time it runs it'll be a new execution and not you.

Ok then, it is like I have a program running. I then make an exact copy of the running program during execution, including all live data that the program is using and it's current processes, and then update everything else in my computer to interact with the new program, and then stop the old process, all instantaneously.
You wouldn't even notice the difference. You wouldn't have to look at the opening splat screen again, because state was copied over. No loading screens, because data was copied. You wouldn't even see the screen flash black for a second, because it is instant.

Unless you knew it was happening, you wouldn't even realise, and the program would chug along happily.

I suspect I might be bad at metaphors. But I think our point of difference is that I consider myself to be not only the sum of my personality and memories, but also my innate ability to percieve the world and differentiate myself from it. The first is easily preserved via teleportation, the second is not portable. It's not a soul - it's the fact that each copy of a thing is inherently separate.

So your argument still depends on something intangible, unmeasurable, unfalsifiable, and therefor ultimately supernatural.
It is different from a soul the same way vampires are different from zombies.

[GlyphGryph]

also my innate ability to percieve the world and differentiate myself from it. The first is easily preserved via teleportation, the second is not portable. It's not a soul - it's the fact that each copy of a thing is inherently separate.

Why do you believe it's not portable, and why does it matter?

[Ehndras]

It's no different from if you made an exact copy and then put a bullet through your own head. Your mind wouldn't jump to the other one. It'd be splattered all over the wall.

It is totally different! There is a lot less mess to clean up.
I think people get a little too superstitious about their sense of self... 'Your' mind, as in everything that makes your mind unique, would be copied over.

It's like if I had a CD, copied it over to form a second CD with the exact content, then smashed the first. Yes, I am breaking a CD, but nothing of value is lost, even if that CD had some very valuable data on it.

Indeed, everyone's fear of their consciousness being non-transferable is exactly that, our very human trait of assuming we are special and unique and a deeply-held fear of that not being true

Like everyone is now discussing, the real issue isn't with the nature of the differing consciousness, but with people's perception of the uniqueness of their individual consciousness and the belief that the reflected consciousness would not be identical to theirs simply because it is not the originator. If one might think of it as they would data on the internet... Sure, there is an originating file, but if a perfect copy is made and the file sent to twenty other individuals via internet, do they not all possess the same exact program that fulfills the same exact role, was created originally in the same exact location and time, and is perfectly identical in every way shape and form?

I wouldn't go so far as to fully classify the nature of that belief, you can research psychology for the answer to man's fears and beliefs regarding consciousness and spirit. What it really does come down to, though, is whether or not you TRULY believe there is a soul or not. I say truly because you can think you don't, yet your upbringing and culture may have ingrained within you that very same sense of individuality of consciousness even though you wouldn't attribute it to the accompanying spiritual terminology.

Me, I got over that fear a long time ago. I see the brain as a field generator, and our consciousness as a permeating energy and construct of our brain in its exact configuration. Our consciousness will metamorphose if our brain chemistry or shape changes due to blunt trauma, chemical interaction or extreme emotional stress, therefore I believe that our consciousness would, by my incomplete logic, not be TRANSFERRED by teleportation, but generated by the new brain on the other side. Not only that, but both the originator and the host brains would generate consciousness, though they'd not be the same simply due to the fact that they branched out in Time. The psychological stimuli created by transference would simulate meeting yourself from the past or from an alternate universe, if you want to put such a thing into perspective, since your consciousness changes every passing second. Any slight deviation in Time, neuro-chemistry, or stimuli would subsequently create a fork in the road and as such, your two identical consciousnesses would no longer be One.

Hello, tele-clone! A REFLECTION created via teleportation differs from a CLONE. A clone would be BASED off of an individual host's physical, emotional and mental reality yet the process of creating a clone, which must be aged, would invariably create a rift between the two. Now, teleportation...

Whether the entire body is being physically and energetically de-materialized then transferred through space in some sort of quantum particle state, OR the body is being reproduced as a perfect copy through a process more akin to that of 3D printing, the host would not be 'grown' as with clones, but reflected over to the receiving end of the bodily transference.

So, it falls down to three broad categories. In cloning, your genetic material is taken to create a mostly-identical copy of you who will develop its own branching consciousness, and two of the many theories of teleporation; the most common energy-transference idea where you are broken down to your base mechanical parts and fired through space only to be rebuilt on the opposite side via some sort of complex mechanical process, OR you'd be scanned to the very depths of your unique cellular makeup, your DNA structure entirely mapped, and a perfect replica of you created in whichever location contains the necessary equipment for such an endeavor.

Of course, if people believe its #2 yet its #3, we may one day end up with reflected 'clones' of us running around...

That'd be the day.