X-Message-Number: 32893
From: 
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:45:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Reply to Brook

In #32889 Brook Norton suggests a "cache" giving rise to an  illusion of 
time span. However, I claim that there is (probably) a literal,  physical span 
of time (and also of space) for any condition or event, the reason  being 
that (probably) nothing can exist at a moment of time (in a zero  interval) 
or at a point in space (in a zero volume). For whatever it is worth,  current 
quantum physics includes a spread of being.
 
It is certainly true, as Brook says, that we have been shaped by evolution  
and accident to tend to treasure unfounded beliefs. Brook says that  

logically it shouldn't matter to you whether you live or die, but I don't  think
his argument holds.
 
R.E.
 
In a message dated 10/1/2010 5:00:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
 writes:

CryoNet  - Fri 1 Oct 2010

#32889: "Survival" possibilities [Brook  Norton]
#32890: Reasons Why Uploading Is Unlikely, Ever   [Ettinger]

Rate This Digest:  http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32889%2D32890

Administrivia

To  subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:

with the subject line (not message  _body_):
subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject  line:
unsubscribe
To post a message to CryoNet, send your  message to:

from the same address to  which you are aubscribed.
Send questions, comments, or feedback to  
with "CryoNet" or "cryonics" somewhere in the Subject  line.



Message  #32889
From: Brook Norton <>
Subject: "Survival"  possibilities
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 13:00:43 -0700

Content-type:  text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Norton:  We can "continue" (in large part, never 100% unchanged) but not
"survive".  And we can "continue" as a corpse, as an upload, as a duplicate,
whatever -  all equal options as continuers - but there are no survivors. 
And
so  concern over which is the true way to survive is misguided   concern.



Ettinger: Equal options? Surely not. In my view, a  survivor is a continuer.
Continuers (in particular  your qualia)  overlap each other in space and
time, which allows partial identification  of later and earlier versions, 
and
we must settle for  that.  The  fact that duplicates or whatever would seem
"as good as" to  outside  observers is irrelevant.



Norton (this post): I'm calling a  survivor one who advances through time,
bringing along some special  identity-critical quality that makes the later
person the "same person" as  the earlier person. I'm calling a continuer one
who advances through time,  changing in accordance with the laws of nature,
such that the later person  is changed (at least in small part) from the
earlier person and has no  claim to be the "same person" because there is no
identity-critical quality  that goes along with the person through time.



If there is some  identity-critical quality, name it.



Ettinger posits that that  quality is the qualia because the qualia of the
earlier and later (a  fraction of a second later) person overlap in time. 
The
same qualia  existing at different times. Ah ha, the special-quality that 
the
person  takes with him through time. It is tempting to see the qualia as
spanning  time because the qualia integrates our past states in the last
fraction of  a second with our current state at time = now, resulting in an
awareness of  who we are and what we are doing at present. But there is no
need to invoke  new time-spanning physics to explain how the qualia
integrates internal and  external sensory inputs over time. I image the 
brain
has a "cache" where it  stores the sensory inputs from last few moments, 
then
either forgetting the  data or moving them to the next brain section for
integration into longer  term memory. The qualia integrates the current
sensory inputs with the  near-past "cache" and results in awareness. Caching
takes the place of  time-spanning. So we are again left with no special
identity-critical  quality that moves with the person through time.



Ettinger  objects that continuing as a corpse is certainly not equal (in
preference)  to continuing as a healthy person. Well, if one comes to accept
the above  argument that a future person is not "the same person" as an
earlier  person, then, logically, one is left with the conclusion that it
does not  matter what becomes of future continuers. I can't see any grand
design or  grand purpose to the universe, and so the universe does not care
what  happens to me. Gravity will just as happily redirect my motion in  a
beneficial or a harmful way. I think that approach extends to the  personal
level as well - there is no better or worse future for a  continuer. All 
that
REALLY matters is how I feel NOW. Sorry if that's a  disappointing view of
the meaning of life, but I didn't design the whole  thing.



What? I don't care if I live or die in the next  minute??  This is where 
I'll
invoke the evolutionary-mirage. As  described in a prior post, evolution
makes us feel good when we envision a  healthy future, and feel bad when we
envision a future that threatens our  continuation. My fear in the face of
imminent death is an evolutionarily  ingrained emotional reaction without
logical consistency. Like being  frightened of flying when you are in a good
airplane. Were I able to fully  accept, at a visceral level, that my
continuer is not the same person, then  I would not care if I died or lived
in the next  minute.



Brook Norton




 Content-type: text/html;  CHARSET=US-ASCII

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32893