Mechanus Posted
So when we need to select a type of personal identity we want to use in judging whether we have survived or not, there is no right answer and we have to make some arbitrary choice
I would disagree with that on a fundamental level.
This "selection", while it could be predisposed by some personal (whether logically demonstrative or not) meme, is not the fundamental cause and effect.
Another choice could be the spatiotemporal continuity-of-atoms type of identity you propose, but I think it's much less elegant and it's not in accord with my intuitions about computer files, which say for example that if I move a file to a floppy disk from my hard drive, it's still the same file.
I would agree that total discernment; inasmuch as that is possible, behind a human mind tends to destroy alot of the "elegance" as you put it, to our definitive nature.
Such is a fact of knowledge.
Many people have often looked into the night sky, played connect-the-dots and drawn images of their fabled imaginations, or ones corresponding to elements of their real life. But in the end, they are just stars, giant spheres of fusion, burning billions of miles away. To those who are not educated, the night skies do indeed hold wonders; depictions of ancient beasts and gods, and portray a "magical" nature.
The fact that we attempt to make meaningful patterns of otherwise random phenomenon, or to label something that is not objectively understood as exhibiting some "special magic", is a testament to our search for a personal connection to things and states of affairs.
As to the file manipulation on your hard drive, that couldn't prove my point more.
If you copy a file to another location, then indeed it is duplicated. While the contents are exactly the same, it is a duplication, not the "original."
Now let us say that you instead specify to your computer that you merely want to "Move" a file to another location. The file is then literally copied, one byte at a time to another location while the previous file is deleted one byte at a time.
Now of course, this is only ideally. The software OS doesn't actually do this, but the principle is the same. The "Moved" file is still the original, but merely
in transient. Obviously when applying a similar concept with regard to human biological neural architecture, one must make sure that the parts being transferred to another location/medium are also re-intergrated with the previous medium by way of information interaction processes. And also, there may exist elements to the human biological mind that are not required to be integrated within active transience. Such as memories of ones youth that are scarcely ever recalled, but still remain within our minds.
That's the sort of (arbitrary) definition of identity I would choose to use then while realizing that there is no absolute fact as to my True Identity.
I would disagree with that, and here is why.
As I stated, our "True identity" is the preservation of our active, transient, consciousness, nothing more. Using spatiotemporal continuity couldn't be closer to the truth. Now while granted, ones mind changes slightly from moment to moment, it is this transience that defines us. It requires a bit of abstract thinking.
Example:
I am who I am today, because of who I was yesterday, and who I wanted to be yesterday when I thought of being who I wanted to be today.
Hence, the affirmation of who we are, based on who we were, and who we wanted to be.
Now, lets take that in a slightly smaller time frame.
I am at this second, because of who I was a second ago, and who I wanted to be a second from then, which is who I am now.
Time plays a crucial role. It isn't necessarily maintaining yourself from the exact same "Brain meat", for as we all know, this "meat" is in constant transience. It is ever changing with what we eat, what our cells metabolize, etc. In the literal sense, nothing of our original matter still resides within ourselves, except for perhaps bone and tendon matter. Muscles have all be replaced, blood replaced, skin, hair, cellular membrane fluid, etc...since we were born.
Perhaps a better definition might suffice. Lets instead say that it is: "The collective states and conditions by which our conscious minds exist in transience, from moment to moment, in reference to present, previous, and future moments."
This does not mean that every last atom must be considered, no. Indeed, as I previously stated, many memories and skills are locked away, somewhere amidst the billions of neurons, some never to be recalled for years after they were imprinted. Now our fundamental "Now" selves might have culminated the various aspects of such memories into more commonly used pathways, and eventually integrated base properties of those aspects into what we would then refer to as "Active consciousness."
It is those properties of active consciousness; that which defines me at this moment, that would be lost forever if a mere "snap-shot" of those conditions were made and then stored for some future program to run in a different location.
Perhaps this might help to clarify what "Definition of self" I am referring to.
But as you said, many people may not really care what form their "selves" take, and or whether or not their active consciousness survives any "uploading" process, and that's perfectly acceptable. Let those who wish to be lost (what I would ascribe to "Semi-objectively lost) be lost; only to exist as a continuance in some other form. While those who are hard-pressed to retain as much of their "active self" as they can, be allowed to pursue such a venture as well.
In the end, it ultimately is a decision that is up to the person(s) involved.
Edited by Omnido, 08 April 2003 - 04:56 AM.
