X-Message-Number: 19879
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:15:43 EDT
Subject: viewpoints

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mike Perry says a case can be made for either the "pattern" or "token" view 
of identity, and no experiment can prove one better than the other. This is 
the (apparent) central feature of "philosophical" issues.

However, I think that all philosophical issues are language problems or 
misunderstandings of one sort or another. After all--putting it vaguely but I 
think cogently--if you really understand something, you are not in doubt. If 
you are in doubt this proves you really don't have a clear or full 
understanding--you lack either data or a basis or both.

One might  ask, are there not situations where the choice is arbitrary and 
yours is as good as mine? I say no, aside from trivialities like choosing a 
necktie, and maybe not even there. If your basis is explicit and 
quantitative, then the solution is always unique, barring trivialities. You 
can fool yourself--and that may sometimes even be a good idea--but you can't 
fool Ma Nature.

Robert Ettinger


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=19879