Yeah, probably just for the first few times though. But that 100th time (or however many times he did it), he has the memory of being the guy appearing on the balcony every single time. Even if it were known that it was a 50/50 shot of who gets drowned/balconied (yeah, new word), he has to start thinking he’s above the laws of probability.
All I saw was a bunch of irrelevant nonsense about political systems that have no bearing on the question. Was there an explanation in there?
So the reprogrammed John Smith, though he has no continuity of consciousness with CandidGamera and no physical continuity with CandidGamera, is CandidGamera because all his molecules are in the same pattern and he thinks he’s CandidGamera.
Huh. Well, I’ve never heard an assertion quite that ridiculous before, but you’re welcome to it, I suppose.
I said it’s an easy logical distinction. In the context of the film, we don’t know how the machine works, so we don’t know which is the real one.
The surviving Danton shot by the Borden brother is less than a year old. He is mentally and physically discontinuous with the original Danton.
You said your concern was simply to describe the situation in a way that is accurate to the facts. I explained that accuracy to the facts doesn’t suffice in this case. I explained why–because the choice is between languages, not facts. This invites the question, “how do you choose between languages?” I said what I think about the answer to the question–that in this case it’s basically a political question, and you choose between languages by examining the political consequences. (And I mentioned that I tend to do that by applying a kind of criterion of empathy.)
As you can see, then, none of it was irrelevant nonsense, and every bit of it had bearing on the question. Each bit of the post had implications for what we should say about who is the same person as who in a situation of personal duplication.
Hopefully that brief summary clears up the relevance issue.
You’re making a huge assumption about how the machine works that fails the Occam’s Razor test. There’s no reason to believe that half the molecules go to one Danton and half go to the other. If there were a reason to believe that, then the situation would be ambiguous enough for the “same guy” people to have a point - but the simplest explanation is that the duplicate is created whole cloth.
You’re interested in the political implications. I’m not.
Do you think it was a mistake to punish the last Danton for the crimes of the first (or of Dantons in between)?
No, I don’t agree with that diagnosis.
I’m arguing that the only way to decide how to talk about this situation is through consideration of (really either the ethical or the political) consequences of choosing to talk this way or that.
This is an argument against your view that there is simply a fact of the matter, and our task is simply to describe the situation accurately.
It’s not a mere difference of interest. It’s a substantive disagreement. I think the choice in this case isn’t between understandings of the facts, but rather between languages used to describe those facts. You think the converse. That’s a real disagreement.
I think we all understand the facts perfectly well, and we’re really engaged in a kind of terminological dispute–but an important one with real consequences. You think that I’ve misunderstood the facts. Again, that’s a real, substantive disagreement, not a mere difference in interests.
Thanks for taking a stab at my question. My comment was totally tongue in cheek! No need to repost the OP “feel free” language!
But he does have the kinds of continuity you refer to. He’s got the new configuration because of the configuration you yourself had as you created him.
It’s not the normal biological continuity we’re used to, but it’s continuity nonetheless.
(I’m not letting on, though, that I even think if some entity sprang into existence who was exactly like you down to the atomic level, having sprung into existence completely accidentally and randomly, it’d still be a valid continuation of you–the same person as you. But that’s different. In your scenario, the answer seems even clearer–there is physical and mental continuity (though of a different kind than what we’re used to) and the kind of continuity it is is enough to establish personal identity. He thinks he’s you for all the same reasons you think you’re you.)
So let’s run this down in detail, because I’m getting tired.
Do you agree or disagree that one Danton is physically continuous with the Danton who threw the switch, and the other is not? This is, admittedly, ignoring the “half his molecules go one way, half go the other way” theory, but I don’t find that version of the machine’s function particularly interesting.
I think you and I have different definitions of the word continuity.
Punish? You mean the Borden brother’s vengeance? Not at all. He killed one of Danton’s willing co-conspirators. 
You’re looking at it backwards. The question isn’t whether the surviving Danton was once the original, it’s whether the original Danton will become the survivor. To the original Danton, this is vitally important.
I’ve really enjoyed reading this thread. The Prestige is one of my favorite films, though I had read the book before seeing the movie, this is one of those cases in which I believe the film to be a better version; specifically because it invites so much thought about things like identity.
Most of you make good points, but for me it comes down to a question of drama. It is a story after all, and not being hard science fiction it is concerned with drama first and foremost. This is why the ideas of an amoebic split, and of a 50/50 chance of transport fail in my opinion. One of the chief sources of drama is the fact that the Danton standing on the stage is about to die a horrible death, and he knows it. The man pulling the lever knows that he is about to die. That’s how serious his obsession is. Yes, technically and philosophically the man standing on stage is also about to be “transported” to the balcony, but that doesn’t make a damn bit of difference to the Danton in the tank. I do imagine that it gets easier over time, since the Danton pulling the lever for the hundredth time remembers pulling it 99 times previously, with no memory of drowning. Of course there is always the chance that the machine won’t work this time, which makes his obsession even more insane, as there is no failsafe.
I guess for me it is all about putting yourself in the characters shoes, empathy is chiefly important to me in story reading/watching. And I empathize more with the Danton(s) in the tank, who, in spite of all their previous self-assurances and obsessions, must feel deep regret, pain, and torture for the last few, pathetic moments of their lives.
As for who is the hero and the villain, the philosophical question of identity is what muddies it up. The Borden twins constantly sacrificed their own lives for the sake of each other, ending with the ultimate sacrifice. But so did Danton. He constantly sacrificed himself for his “brothers” as well. Over and over and over again. The theme of sacrifice that threads the story together only works if we focus on the Danton that ends up in the tank.
Danton and Borden are two sides of the same coin, but it lands heads up on Borden, who tries to save a drowning Danton, while Danton allows a Borden to hang.
If we were to film “The Presige 2: Electric Boogaloo”, where we put Danton(v.98) on trial, and cast you as foreman of the jury, would you find him guilty or not guilty of murder (not conspiracy)?
Actually, this is not an assumption at all. The film says it is so. When Tesla responds “They all your hat, Mr. Angier.” he is saying they are all perfect, identical copies. This is a critical, foundational element to the film and should not be cast aside or disregarded. Tesla did not point to an original hat nor say he doesn’t know which is the original. He said what he said clearly and unambiguously.
Maybe you have a real problem understanding the concept of a perfect duplicate, with the same exact memories and experience. Therefore you are forced to disregard any evidence contrary to your worldview.
The original Danton will become both the survivor and the deceased. Because both the survivor and the deceased are the original Danton.
I believe there can be a continuity of consciousness for both. I know this is nearly impossible for some people to grasp, since they are stuck with a mental idea that such a continuity cannot split or diverge.
So let me ask you this: why can’t both men be the original Danton, both men with the original Danton’s continuity of consciousness?
I think he’s objecting to the assumption that Version 1 and Version 2 have “half the original molecules” that was postulated earlier out of thin air (if you’ll pardon the pun).