X-Message-Number: 14807 Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:04:05 +0100 From: Henri Kluytmans <> Subject: Memories are Secondary -->Hi again, David Pizer wrote : >Following is a short commonsense example that will drive a stake through >the heart of the theory that only memories (or only patterns of >information) are the sum total of a self. Could you please read the postings from me and others! As we've already remarked several times : "Information and memory are not the same." !!!! >When this is fully realized the concept of uploading one's mind >will no longer hold any promise, and the fraility of our >condition will be realized. First you must realize that we did never claim that *the mind is only memories*. >First let us grant that memories are patterns of information. Yes, but there are other kinds of information too! >way it turns out that memories are recored in various patterns of >information, we can grant that memories *are* some kind of pattern of >information that are *felt in* a thing we presently call a human mind. >When we think of information and the separate action of feeling the >information in this way, it is clear to us that the mind is separate from >the memories. The memories are probably stored in a part of the brain that >is very close to the mind. It seems that you are confusing a running state and frozen state of the mind. According to the informational theory of identity, the mind is only information when in a frozen state. In a running state (when the process of feeling can take place) the mind is an *information process*. >Surely, it must be certain that no one on this advanced forum has >a problem separating the concepts of memories from that which >percieves them. This is irrelevant. >Then it follows that memories without a mind to percieve them >in cannot exist. But they can. Somebody can read a book or store it away. And a story can still exist without a mind to percieve it. >So it is clear that the mind is separate and more basic then >patterns of information called memories. Hmm, so you agree that memories are only a subset of information... >Now that this has been put to rest, we can all of us have a rest. I would like to know, what was your answer to my hypothetical scenario? Or did you put that to rest ? Grtz, >Hkl Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=14807