Bay 12 Games Forum

Oh and a soul, unless provided by some absolute, infinite, supernatural entity that is always right (what one may call God) is in no way different than a mind or body. It's just data. Information. It's just stored elsewhere.

1)Oh, good point.  I guess my answer switches to
"Presumably conciousness is tied to the physical position of all your brain cells and their interaction, you could prove that they have a stream of conciousness since whenever via recording the exact position and state of every cell for every instant since whenever.
Not that you could actually do that."

2)Okay.  I've a rebuttal to you, but it would hurt my argument with GWG.

Umm... That was talking about clones in general?  It's outright incorrect if used in reference to Grate...

Hah, my bad, I got it backwards.  You were using it to disprove Kri.
Welp, I'll use it against you instead.  How does your argument not fall into the same trap?  If we only use data we can get from this point on forwards, all we have are memories of the past.  By that definition, you are the same person as any person you can remember being, but none that you have forgotten.  So, the me that ate breakfast three weeks ago is not the me now, but the me from three years ago when I signed up on B12 is the same me, cause I remember that.

I write this out once a post don't I?
The state of the original matters more than the copy.  The copy's experiences are irrelevant, because it's a copy the moment that it exists.  The fact the original already died (or still exists) defines it as a copy.  Not the copy having different experiences.

Hmmm...  You only have proof of one point- the one that is in the current instant, so...

Quote from: GWG

Ever hear of Last Tuesdayism? Short version, you have no way of knowing that there was a time before the now. It's an interesting philosophical concept. From such a perspective, it isn't hard to see why the concept of "an unbroken chain of consciousness" is kinda silly. How can you ever know if you are, say, the "real" Kriellya or a perfect clone thereof? (Assume that this is possible in your world.)
Any time that someone cannot ever prove that they are "real" is kinda silly and should be avoided.

Give me a moment.  The irony is beautiful.
...

Anyways, that's what I've been saying this whole time!  "You" requires a line that can be drawn from your beginning of your life to the end.  I'm happy to see we're coming to an understanding~!

Aww, I had hoped you'd fall to the father thing.  Oh well.
Pretty much we agree here.  I had hoped you would just deny it because I implied the opposite, and I would have had you.  Oh well.

I am assuming that in his analogy, the "imprint" is akin the an automata's rulestring, albeit a dynamically changing one with thoughts being patterns formed. What I interpret that third point to be is that this rulestring's influence to and from the environment determines it which I suppose is akin to a gun-type pattern perturbing another pattern. In that case, an imprint interaction would be bilateral. I don't think it actually defines identity as the physical effects, but rather the rulestrings and pattern interactions.

((Has everyone else and their mother played LoL??))

@GWG: by your physical definition, do electrons exist?

And would this argument apply to, say, a Frankenstein's monster that never gets reanimated?

Also, is it appropriate to use "I think, therefore I am" when you're trying to define what "I" and "am" mean?

And by interchangeability I mean exactly that - can you substitute one for the other?

Also, how is the mind and personality independent of the body in principle?

two ominous words: insanity penalty.