X-Message-Number: 17095 From: Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:41:16 EDT Subject: Pride goeth before... George Smith and Scott Badger have made some excellent points--all of which have been visited many times by many people over many years, but remain slippery, elusive, and multi-faceted. Just a couple of quick remarks: "Self-esteem" can be a counterproductive criterion, as Mr. Smith says, but it can also be useful. In some contexts self-esteem could be called "pride," which goeth before a fall but also goeth before a climb or before a noble effort. And it's difficult to avoid pride--aren't the humble proud of their humility? Aren't you proud of the successes and virtues of your friends and relatives? Everything in its place. Dr. Badger recalls some aspects of "identity" vs. growth. We aspire to become superhuman as well as immortal, and (with luck) we even anticipate a time when our future selves will have very little in common with our present selves, and may not even be interested in retaining memories of these ancient times. (A little thought experiment: Suppose that we had evolved in a different way, not by individuals breeding and then dying, but by the individuals themselves gradually changing over time. For all we know, that might even be possible, in a slightly different world, and in fact something like that actually happens with some microorganisms. We would not remember or care about our earlier incarnations. Why should we care about "our" future incarnations?) There is also the question of the exeriencer vs. the experienced. I tend to suspect they ARE the same, or at any rate that the experience is more important than the substrate or carrier. (If a silicon brain could have your feelings, as well as your memories and pesonality etc.--which is not at all clear--would it not be another you, or another being essentially equivalent to you from the point of view of a third party?) Feeling, or subjective experience, is in the quale, the physical embodiment of life-as-we-know-it, possibly a modulated standing wave in the brain, binding space and time. Well, we simply don't have all the answers yet, and should resist the temptation to pretend we do. But it seems to me to be shaping up something like this: Since we (probably) can't change the past or the present, all motivation concerns the future. For this reason, and because qualia bind space and time, and because the goal is feel-good, we must aim to maximize personal feel-good over future time. To assign the weights correctly is the formidable task which we have barely begun to address. Common sense tells us that, other things equal, nearer rewards are worth more than distant ones, and are also easier to calculate and less uncertain; and major goals are worth more than minor ones. We may have almost nothing in common with our distant-future selves, but we connect through a series of overlaps. (You probably don't care much about the fates of your unborn great-great grandchildren, but you care about the closer generations, who in turn care about the later.) Switching from time to space, charity begins at home, and you probably don't care much about misery in distant places, but again the connection is not zero because of the overlaps as well as the concepts. Lots of work ahead. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17095