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 ?


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=14807