Print

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

Yes

10 (17.9%)

No

46 (82.1%)

Total Members Voted: 53

[Xantalos]

That depends on the cultural attitude at the times. The minimum tends to be 12 for females and 13 for males, but in some places the age can be as high as 25.

Hmm. In that case, I don't think I'm in an adult body yet.

[Catsup]

Hmm. In that case, I don't think I'm in an adult body yet.

you sound pretty calculating and miserly for an 11 year old O_o

[Xantalos]

Hmm. In that case, I don't think I'm in an adult body yet.

you sound pretty calculating and miserly for an 11 year old O_o

I think I'm past that seeing as my body seems to have entered a state of recalibration and indoctrination in which my emotional balance is significantly more fragile than before, and it seems to come with the added effect of physical maturation. I'd guess it's in the middle stages of the puberty thing or something?
Either way, I was like this when my body was 11. If I remember correctly it was offputting to most people.

[Catsup]

on the topic of brain aging, that is actually not as deadly as body aging IMO cuz there are certain things you can do to slow down mental illnesses from aging, such as by keeping intellectually engaged and playing mentally challenging games that require logic.

Im also assuming some sort of tissue rejuvenation technology would have been developed by the time cloning is developed to help regrow your brain, or some sort of synthetic technology that can slowly replace the brain with synthetic tissue that is inorganic.

[MagmaMcFry]

I should probably also define the concept of dying. Here's a definition: Dying is something that only bodies can do, it results in permanent absence of consciousness and therefore loss of any memories saved on the brain.

Consciousnesses can't "die", since they don't exist for measurable periods of time.

ok then we agree being alive means you have the "ability to become conscious". You lose that ability when you die and your brain rots. It doesnt matter if you have a clone with the same memories as you. You wont one day suddenly re-awaken in your clones' beautiful, youthful body (unless you transferred your brain into them).

And here's the part where I need you to define what you mean by "you". Also, in case you misunderstood, the clone isn't younger than you, it's a perfect copy-paste of all your particles at the time of cloning.

[ShoesandHats]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.
For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

[Graknorke]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.
For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

Ah, but the thing is that both of those are you. At least, both are you as you are now. They are not each other since they change after the cloning process, but both are you.
Unless you mean from the perspective of the one who gets crushed by a watermelon. Sucks for him I guess.

[Max White]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.
For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

In the case of real life cloning that we have right now, while the two have the same genetics (Mostly) that have different conditioning.
Your clone, in the given example, would look, walk, talk, think, remember, and feel like you. Everything that makes you who you are, it would be, thus it would be you.

[ShoesandHats]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.
For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

Ah, but the thing is that both of those are you. At least, both are you as you are now. They are not each other since they change after the cloning process, but both are you.
Unless you mean from the perspective of the one who gets crushed by a watermelon. Sucks for him I guess.

Yes, they are both "me", but only one of me is me-me.  Only I see through my eyes and think with my brain, and only my copy sees through his eyes and thinks with his brain. I-I don't just carry on living in the other one's body. I don't see through his eyes or think with his brain. He carries on living as a separate entity. He is a different person.

Edit: Although, yes, he does think exactly like me.

[MagmaMcFry]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.

Same thing applies to you. Please give the definition of the word "me" as you used it in this context.

For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

Here's a list of definitions we've (well, I've) established for those words:
Mind: Set of memories.
Consciousness: Instance of a set of thoughts acting on and modifying a mind. Every consciousness only exists for a single point in time.
Cloning: Per-particle copy/paste duplication. Particle physics and neuroscience says this copies the entire mind.
Dying: A thing that only bodies can do, interring permanent absence of consciousness, therefore essentially irrecoverable loss of the mind.

Now by your idea of cloning, the original and the clones would have entirely different minds, and I would definitely not agree to have my body cloned in this way and subsequently killed. But by my definition (which is the one applying to the poll question) the mind is copied with the body. The clone has all the memories and thoughts of the original at the time of cloning.

[Graknorke]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.
For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

Ah, but the thing is that both of those are you. At least, both are you as you are now. They are not each other since they change after the cloning process, but both are you.
Unless you mean from the perspective of the one who gets crushed by a watermelon. Sucks for him I guess.

Yes, they are both "me", but only one of me is me-me.  Only I see through my eyes and think with my brain, and only my copy sees through his eyes and thinks with his brain. I-I don't just carry on living in the other one's body. I don't see through his eyes or think with his brain. He carries on living as a separate entity. He is a different person.

Edit: Although, yes, he does think exactly like me.

Can we define "me" for a moment? Are you talking about you as in you now, or you as in the one in the unspecified future who gets his head crushed by some falling fruit?

[ShoesandHats]

Alright. This is a discussion that interests me. So, here's my two cents:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.

Same thing applies to you. Please give the definition of the word "me" as you used it in this context.

For a real-world example, take Dolly the sheep, or dead pet cloning services. That animal is biologically identical, or, at the very least, as close as they can get to identical, yet completely separate entities. Just because it walks like the original mind and quacks like the original mind doesn't mean it is the original mind. The minute one copy's lights go out, a consciousness has died.

Here's a list of definitions we've (well, I've) established for those words:
Mind: Set of memories.
Consciousness: Instance of a set of thoughts acting on and modifying a mind. Every consciousness only exists for a single point in time.
Cloning: Per-particle copy/paste duplication. Particle physics and neuroscience says this copies the entire mind.
Dying: A thing that only bodies can do, interring permanent absence of consciousness, therefore essentially irrecoverable loss of the mind.

Now by your idea of cloning, the original and the clones would have entirely different minds, and I would definitely not agree to have my body cloned in this way and subsequently killed. But by my definition (which is the one applying to the poll question) the mind is copied with the body. The clone has all the memories and thoughts of the original at the time of cloning.

When I say me in the first part I mean the original me. So yeah. Me.

And yes, real-world cloning perhaps wasn't the best analogy. The basis of the argument still stands.

[Graknorke]

But who is the original you? Do you mean you as you are now; or the future iteration of yourself who steps out of that person copying machine? Those are two different people, and it's important as to which you mean.

[MagmaMcFry]

When I say me in the first part I mean the original me. So yeah. Me.

That's kinda circular there. Do you mean your mind, or do you mean your body, or do you mean a consciousness? Because your body dies, but your mind survives.
Would you please rephrase this:

Say someone cloned me in the sci-fi sense of the word. I go in, two of me come out. Now, say that a watermelon fell on my head and I tragically died. The moment of my death, all sensation and thought would leave me. I would not, somehow, be transported into my client's body. We are two identical yet separate entities. My clone will be a different person with the same personality.

while clarifying for every instance of "I" or "me" or "my" or "we" what exactly you mean by that? Body, mind or consciousness?

[alway]

But who is the original you? Do you mean you as you are now; or the future iteration of yourself who steps out of that person copying machine? Those are two different people, and it's important as to which you mean.

Mu.

Those questions are fundamentally flawed, as they make an immense volume of assumptions. First among which is that there is such a thing as 'you.' A thing which exists. This is absolutely false. "You" is simply a cascade of neural activity within a mesh network of signal modification influenced by outside forces. A concept we impose, not a thing which actually exists.

A related question is this: if I were to move a file on my hard drive, is it still the same file, despite it possibly being copied and deleted, or having its meaning changed by the file system? Similarly, is the game you are playing the same game you played before, since it is loaded into different areas in memory than last time? Mu. In both cases, something has happened to these concepts we designate as 'things' out of convenience. But they aren't things. They're abstractions we use to think about the world because to do otherwise would be too complicated to be practical on just about any level. That is to say, don't get caught up in the terminology and mental constructs; if you find yourself going down a rabbit hole, it's likely because you are making too many assumptions when you ask your questions.

Getting trapped in concepts of our own making with no bearing or existence in reality is as pointless as asking how many angels can sit on the head of a pin. There is no original; there is no copy; there is no you.