The original body has died. The original mind, however, is still very much alive.
not true, because the original mind which includes the original's "ability to become conscious" died with the original brain. You have a clone that is similar in every possible way, except they have their own "ability to become conscious" that is unique from that of the original.
If you accept the word "mind" to mean what I repeatedly defined it to mean, then my statement is perfectly true. You can't just go ahead and change the definitions I base my statements upon. That's a fallacy as well as a dick move.
then i misworded it, your definition of mind refers to the collection of memory. My definition of what i was referring to refers to the collection of memory in addition to awareness and ability to observe new memory, and the ability to react to stimuli.
Even your own definition of mind cannot differentiate between the mind of the original body and the mind of the copy. My statement is very well true.
based on your original definition of mind, i dont think a simple collection of memories can be called "alive" on its own.
I used the word "alive" in this situation because you used the word "dead" in the very same situation, and I thought you would understand what you mean if you expect me to understand what you mean. Since you don't, let me rephrase that in my own terms:
The original body has died. The original mind, however, is still readily accessible to a consciousness.
EDIT: Also, a "mind", satisfying your definition of "mind", can't be alive either.
Because it's perfectly okay to not want to die and have some impostor replace you, and because they (like you) failed to see that the poll situation is not actually what they thought they were voting about (edit: or because they have emotion diarrhea?).
so everyone has emotion diarrhea but you, and you view the poll as valid despite it misleading the majority of ppl who voted?
No, the emotion diarrhea was specifically referring to Graknorke. Sorry for the confusion there. And the question was not misleading, it's just that the majority of people didn't think through the complete ramifications of mind-copying before they voted.
and im the one rampantly equivocating eh?
Yes.
We already established that we can't continue discussing when people rampantly equivocate. Please stop doing that, right now.
so we can do a logical discussion using make-belief and hypothetical arguments in a thread about realistic cloning, but we cant express our meaning in any other ways than that which you understand?
This thread was never about realistic cloning. And all I'm trying to do is to stop you from being able to trip yourself up in logical fallacies, so that I don't have to spend half my posts untangling you again.