X-Message-Number: 25184 Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:04:14 -0800 Subject: A (Broken Record) Response to Donald From: <> Dear Donald: You wrote: "A small question: first, suppose you have been copied, then destroyed, and then rebuilt exactly --- for the sake of the metaphysics involved, with the very same molecules. In just what way do you fail to be the same person?" I have explained this quite a few times already, and am beginning to sound like a broken record. If you copy an apple, then you have two apples: one of them is the original, and one of them is the copy. The original existed prior to the copy. Even if they are atomically identical, you still have two apples. Destroying the original does not magically transform the copy into the original. The copy is always a copy. The reason an electron microscope could not tell the difference between the two apples is because in order to do so, it would have to measure differences across spacetime, but it is only capable of measuring differences across space. But the fact that the microscope cannot tell the difference doesn't mean there isn't one. One of the apples is the original, and one of them is a copy. No amount of wordplay can change this fact of life. Another way of phrasing this is Robert's 'continuity criterion'. Robert expresses his uncertainty as to whether or not this is important for survival. I am convinced it is, unless we reached a state tremendous advance in the sciences in directions unknown to us now. However, I am sure he would agree with me on this---that whether or not the continuity criterion is ultimately important, it is best from a risk management perspective to assume that it is. You wrote: "Again, how do we know that while we sleep our QE (= Qualia Experiencer) isn't destroyed and then recreated when we awaken?" Put a video camera on your brain. Is it destroyed and recreated? No. Then neither is your qualia experiencer, which is PART of your brain. We could plainly tell if your QE were destroyed and recreated every night, since this would involve breaking and making numerous chemical bonds, which would release a great amount of heat, and the phenomenon would be plainly visible on IR cameras and would no doubt cause blistering (perhaps even combustion) of the skin. Why do you insist on postulating the destruction/creation of the QE, when it is so easy to prove that it doesn't happen? Perhaps you mistake my view for one in which 'I' am not the gray matter residing in my skull. But in my view, I AM the gray matter residing in my skull. Or at least, some portion thereof. Therefore, your day/night scenarios are not only implausible, but verifiably false. [snip] Best Regards, Richard B. R. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25184