From: John K Clark (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Mar 16 2008 - 11:37:02 MDT
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:03:32 -0700, "Lee Corbin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Heartland has said repeatedly that he is not attached to his atoms.
He has been all over the map on this issue. First he tried to convince
me that atoms were not generic, talking about their “space time
trajectories” (a fancy way of saying atoms move); and I’m not talking
about just one post, he went on and on about it. When that didn’t work
he didn’t renounce his previous position but he did change direction
slightly and said it wasn’t the atoms themselves that was important but
the activity of those atoms. That was certainly an improvement but I
pointed out that the scientific method can detect no difference between
the same process happening to 2 identical atoms. I received to answer to
this devastating criticism.
Mr. Heartland told me “Of course, the copy would "feel" that the
original subjective experience has been transferred successfully.
However, the point is that dead original wouldn't.”
Leaving aside the very obvious fact that if you THINK you’re dead then
you can’t be and if you THINK you’ve survived then you have I asked him
just exactly what was so original about “The Original”, and he soon got
back on the good old atoms express. He can deny it from now to next
month but it always comes back to atoms.
By the way Lee I’m really curious, do you agree with Mr. Heartland that
anesthesia is equivalent to death?
John K Clark
-- John K Clark email@example.com -- http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users: http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:02 MDT