X-Message-Number: 25497
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 23:20:46 -0700
From: Mike Perry <>
Subject: Re: subjective inner life
References: <>

Richard wrote:

>I have remarked that if I am frozen and destructively scanned, and
>this scan is used to create N duplicates, then my subjective inner
>life can continue in at most one duplicate.

Words are tricky, and different people may mean quite different things with 
the same words. If I understand correctly what is meant by "subjective 
inner life" here it appears that I don't think it can continue at all for 
very long--whatever it is, it's just a momentary thing at best, maybe like 
what we call the "present." To me, the person I am today *can* continue to 
survive--in a sense--but only if there is a suitable future construct, call 
it a continuer, that remembers this self of today. But certainly there 
could be more than one such construct--it's just that in our world we don't 
have such multiple continuers--yet (unless perhaps you count a few cases of 
split brain patients, or perhaps people who develop multiple 
personalities). When we do, though, I think it will be reasonable to speak 
of the "self" of today surviving in more than one of these beings of 
tomorrow. Yes, each being would (normally) be separate and distinct, but 
all would have memories of a single past. One might see the sun while the 
other sees the moon--so what? The two could equally feel they *were* the 
"me" of today, and, I think, their claims would, under suitable conditions 
of fidelity of memories and such, be valid. Both could say they *were* one 
and the same--once--but of course, no longer. Incidentally, according to 
the many-worlds theory, we are constantly splitting into duplicates which 
share a common past, but start to diverge very quickly as soon as the 
division occurs (even though they are non-interacting and occupy whole 
different surroundings or "worlds"). If many-worlds is valid, I think it 
would annihilate any "subjective inner life" that could continue in at most 
one of these duplicates and thereby mark it as "special" in some 
unverifiable way.

Best to all,
Mike Perry

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25497