# I Gotta Split. Paradox?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [October 22, 2005, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391 "2005-10-22T04:09:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 1, 2005, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/141 "2005-11-01T23:43:31Z")

</div>

> [@Tibbycat](#):
>
> After due consideration, perhaps I shouldn’t have gone quite as micro as I did. In an attempt to simplify this step, I may inadvertently have made it more ambiguous. Got a bit carried away. Sorry.
> 
> Restatement: I’m looking for a physical link that the original has over time that is not shared between the original and the duplicate.
> 
> We can keep it at the cellular level. The brain loses a large number of cells during its lifetime. Those cells are not required to maintain consciousness. Of those cells that remain, many or all of them will change in some way. Brain metabolism will bring material to and from the cells. There is even evidence that some new cells are created. The matrix of the brain is dynamic. But, of the cells that remain and evolve, what they have in common is that there is a cohesive physical bond that exists over time. Consciousness is maintained within this physical bond of ever changing cells. I would venture to guess that if all of the cells were “altered” in the same way all at once, consciousness may be extinguished, however, the cells change and evolve at different rates. I believe that your duplicate would have the same cohesive bond of ever changing cells as well. However, I believe that the link is broken during the process of duplication between the original and the duplicate, whereas the link is maintained between the early original and the later original. If this is true, then that identifies a difference between the original and the duplicate.
> 
> Can we agree on the above statement?

All except this special ‘link’ part, which only exists in your fond of imaginations.

If the organism splits into two identical copies, then both copies have the link, or neither have it, or, more likely, it is a meaningless concept

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/142 "2005-11-02T02:45:31Z")

</div>

I think that we’re spending too much time on the “link” problem. We can always come back to it later. Or, perhaps we can solicit some feedback from others. For now, let’s just agree to disagree on the “links”.  
On to new business: SentientMeat mentioned the “instant duplicator” in his ink thumb experiment way back when, so lets go with that and retire the mitosis concept for awhile.

> [@SentientMeat](#):
>
> OK. For when you come back, a useful summary of my position is that _we **are** our memories_. The duplication which occurs over the course of a year or more could conceivably occur overnight, or in the instant duplicator. If my last memory before sleep was you marking by thumb with ink, and then while I slept you put me in a duplicator, yielding an exact copy of me and my memories but without the ink, and then you _killed_ the sleeping SentientMeat with the ink-stained thumb and put the sleeping duplicate back in bed, what would happen?  
> I would wake up, wondering who had cleaned the ink off my thumb in the night.  
> Agreed?

\*\*Same machine, new scenario: \*\*  
You are wearing nothing but a pair of rayon socks. You are told that when you walk into the Instant Duplicator room you will have three duplicates made. The machine does not copy rayon, so the duplicates will be naked, but numbered 1,2 and 3. Each of the duplicates will be given a million dollars. Three of the four people in the room must be terminated while in the room. You are asked which one you want to come out of the room: “socks”, 1,2 or 3? Which one do you choose, and why?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/143 "2005-11-02T08:23:50Z")

</div>

> [@Tibbycat](#):
>
> \*\*Same machine, new scenario: \*\*  
> You are wearing nothing but a pair of rayon socks. You are told that when you walk into the Instant Duplicator room you will have three duplicates made. The machine does not copy rayon, so the duplicates will be naked, but numbered 1,2 and 3. Each of the duplicates will be given a million dollars. Three of the four people in the room must be terminated while in the room. You are asked which one you want to come out of the room: “socks”, 1,2 or 3? Which one do you choose, and why?

This is just an appeal to emotion, which we have already admitted does not yield rational answers. This simply isn’t a useful question.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/144 "2005-11-02T11:42:48Z")

</div>

Or to put it another way, you could have asked me whether I’d be comfortable to eat insects, but my immediate answer would not tell you anything at all about their nutritional value.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/145 "2005-11-02T11:45:38Z")

</div>

> [@Mangetout](#):
>
> This is just an appeal to emotion, which we have already admitted does not yield rational answers. This simply isn’t a useful question.

I agree that when discussing killing, emotions are involved. But, I still think that this is a useful question. So, in order to remove emotion from the equation, let me answer the question and you can simply analyze my response as unemotionally as you can.

Obviously, I would refuse to go into the Duplicating Machine in the first place on moral grounds (to prevent three innocents from being killed), but we will assume that I am forced to do so.

If I were the person in the socks being asked which person (“socks”, 1,2 or 3) I would like to have come out of the room after duplication, my reply would be, “socks”. My reasoning could be summarized by my adding, “why should I die just so that 3 other people can get rich.”

Is my logic faulty?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/146 "2005-11-02T11:52:57Z")

</div>

> [@Tibbycat](#):
>
> I agree that when discussing killing, emotions are involved. But, I still think that this is a useful question. So, in order to remove emotion from the equation, let me answer the question and you can simply analyze my response as unemotionally as you can.
> 
> Obviously, I would refuse to go into the Duplicating Machine in the first place on moral grounds (to prevent three innocents from being killed), but we will assume that I am forced to do so.
> 
> If I were the person in the socks being asked which person (“socks”, 1,2 or 3) I would like to have come out of the room after duplication, my reply would be, “socks”. My reasoning could be summarized by my adding, “why should I die just so that 3 other people can get rich.”
> 
> Is my logic faulty?

It’s not that your logic is faulty, it’s that you’re not using logic, you’re using emotional value-based decisions.

Now, would you like some [fried silkworm pupae](http://eat.bees.net/bugdish.html)? Why not, exactly?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/147 "2005-11-02T13:50:09Z")

</div>

**TibbyCat** , you are NOT LISTENING. You are dragging us all over the place with analogy after analogy without addressing the crucial issue: You are _just plain wrong_ about what your body was made of a few years ago. You are as different to that 2003 body as the splone is to you now. The **overwhelming majority** of the stuff you were made of in 2003 has dispersed in he environment: not 51% (which is likely achieved within _weeks_), not even 75%, but **well over 99%** , with that \<1% comprising residual atoms in long-lived cells like ova, and in stuff like tooth enamel. Those 2003 atoms _were_ in physical contact, but they’re **not anymore**. They were circulated and expelled from the body by [basic biological processes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histology) which you (unconvincingly) say you know something about. If you put a body in space and the atoms cannot be replaced, the body **dies** precisely _because_ the atoms are not replaced. And I’m glad you finally agree that the atom/quark/lepton/superstring bifurcation is irrelevant: whatever an atom is made _of_, the **entire thing** exits your body sooner or later.

The rayon socks scenario is **irrelevant**. The “cohesive physical bond” is **just _false_**. The only constant over time is the **configuration** of the matter, be it cells, atoms, strings, or whatever. The matter _itself_ changes over the years. If you agree with this, we can move on. If you do not, I’m afraid you are just _demonstrably incorrect_.

Now, there is debate about whether the atoms of the memory cells in the brain ever leave the body. That tiny percentage might indeed stay put for your entire lifetime. However, even in this case, then if you accept that memories in a _silicon_ computer can be copied perfectly, then memories in a _biological_ computer surely could also given the “magic” technology of the duplicator. And if two brains contain the same memories, the original consciousness _could_ be said to be “transferred” just as the game of chess could be transferred between boards.

If I may ask you a direct question: What is the difference between a living brain and a dead one? After all, at the moment of death they are _both the same atoms_.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/148 "2005-11-02T14:08:45Z")

</div>

Quite the wiggly worms aren’t you!

For two seemingly intelligent people to think that there is no difference (from the perspective of the original) between the original and a duplicate is preposterous, its inconceivable…well, it’s paradoxical.

Then it hit me. I know that Mangetout is British and I assume that SentientMeat is as well. This is nothing more than absurd British humor. You are yanking my chain and trying to make me look foolish by defending an obviously correct position against an absurd one. I’m only half British, so it took me a little longer to see the humor. Mange and Sentient are lifting a couple of pints in a pub in England laughing about yanking a yanks chain.

If that’s not the case…let me continue…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/149 "2005-11-02T14:20:23Z")

</div>

Appeal to pity now, is it?

I’m not yanking your chain (I’m not convinced that the opposite is not true though); you’re not listening; you’re arguing from emotion and calling it logic, you’re ignoring basic facts of biology and you’re repeatedly misrepresenting and distorting the statements made by **Sentient** and myself.

I think it’s actually _you_ that is not taking this seriously - this particular topic is one of my favourites and for **SentientMeat** , it’s practically his hobbyhorse.

Please would you be kind enough to demonstrate that you at least understand the position that we have been arguing; State mine or **Sentient** ’s case as accurately and concisely as you can (say, less than three sentences), just to reassure everyone you are actually listening.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/150 "2005-11-02T14:21:01Z")

</div>

> [@TibbyCat](#):
>
> it’s paradoxical.

No, it isn’t. _Honestly_, it isn’t. When I say I’m becoming tired of repeating myself, I’m not joking.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/151 "2005-11-02T14:27:39Z")

</div>

The rayon socks scenario is the most relevant question posted in a long time. It cuts to the chase as to what we are arguing about. If you deny this, then you obviously have realized that your position is patently wrong and you are attempting to backtrack. I can explain why you were duped into believing your position was correct in a post or two down the road. I won’t take the same low road to name calling as you have, though you have given me plenty of ammunition. The reason this is taking 10X longer than it should is because I answer your questions directly and you answer mine indirectly.  
You think the rayon sock scenerio is irrelevent, then explain why it is so. Better yet, if you do me any favor at all…just answer the question even if it is, in your mind, irrelevent. If you think that I have misunderstood your position, answering that question will clarify it for me. Answer that question and I’ll answer any that you may have…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/152 "2005-11-02T14:32:06Z")

</div>

> [@Mangetout](#):
>
> Please would you be kind enough to demonstrate that you at least understand the position that we have been arguing; State mine or **Sentient** ’s case as accurately and concisely as you can (say, less than three sentences), just to reassure everyone you are actually listening.

Your position is that you believe that “you” will have a future in your duplicate.

I will continue…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/153 "2005-11-02T14:35:13Z")

</div>

> [@Tibbycat](#):
>
> Your position is that you believe that “you” will have a future in your duplicate.
> 
> I will continue…

OK, perhaps a little less concise than this?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/154 "2005-11-02T14:36:35Z")

</div>

> [@TibbyCat](#):
>
> You are asked which one you want to come out of the room: “socks”, 1,2 or 3? Which one do you choose, and why? … just answer the question even if it is, in your mind, irrelevent.

1, with the other three killed, so that I have £1M and no socially inconvenient identical twins running around. Because the **configuration** is important, not the particular _atoms_ which change over the years anyway.

> [@](#):
>
> The reason this is taking 10X longer than it should is because I answer your questions directly and you answer mine indirectly.

As I have asked directly, what happens at the lung surface and wha is the difference between living and dead tissue given that the atoms in both remain the same ones?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/155 "2005-11-02T14:40:23Z")

</div>

Let me say it another way for clarification.

You have a sense of self, a feeling of “me”. I’ve been using the term POV (point of view). You could probably use other terms to mean the same thing (frame of reference, a sense of self…whatever). I will use POV because it is easy to type.

You believe that your duplicate will inherit your POV. You think that you will feel “carried on” in your duplicate in some way that you would not feel carried on in, say, your identical twin.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/156 "2005-11-02T14:40:38Z")

</div>

> [@Tibbycat](#):
>
> The rayon socks scenario is the most relevant question posted in a long time. It cuts to the chase as to what we are arguing about. If you deny this, then you obviously have realized that your position is patently wrong and you are attempting to backtrack.

No, I repeat, it isn’t relevant because it is an appeal to emotion and fear; neither of which are particularly good methods of determining fact in this case. As I have said, my reluctance to step into the duplicator (no matter _what_ is supposed to be coming out) is not any kind of reliable indicator of anything at all about consciousness; any more than my visceral reluctance to eat insects is a reliable indicator of their nutritional content.

> [@](#):
>
> I can explain why you were duped into believing your position was correct in a post or two down the road. I won’t take the same low road to name calling as you have, though you have given me plenty of ammunition. The reason this is taking 10X longer than it should is because I answer your questions directly and you answer mine indirectly.

I can’t believe you’re saying this; we have gone to great lengths to explain ourselves, over and over; you, on the other hand, have been evasive and have speculated wildly and wilfully ignored plain fact.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/157 "2005-11-02T14:51:08Z")

</div>

> [@SentientMeat](#):
>
> As I have asked directly, what happens at the lung surface and wha is the difference between living and dead tissue given that the atoms in both remain the same ones?

That is an irrelevent question. It’s nothing more than a red herring. I’ll answer it later if you want when I have a chance to also include the reason why it is irrelevent.

> [@SentientMeat](#):
>
> 1, with the other three killed, so that I have £1M and no socially inconvenient identical twins running around. Because the **configuration** is important, not the particular _atoms_ which change over the years anyway.

Thank you for answering the question, finally (feels like pulling teeth at times). I do indeed understand your position as I always thought that I did. Can I take it that you understand my position from the way I answered the same question?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/158 "2005-11-02T14:56:15Z")

</div>

May I assume that you believe that (with regard to the topic at hand) there is a difference between:

1. You and your duplicate
2. You and your identical twin

So far as your POV (sense of self, feeling of being “me”…etc)?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/159 "2005-11-02T15:03:11Z")

</div>

> [@TibbyCat](#):
>
> That is an irrelevent question.

I answered your question even though I thought it irrelevant. Please extend the same courtesy to me. Your answers should make some reference to exchange of atoms and to the _arrangement_ of those atoms if you do indeed understand basic biology.

> [@](#):
>
> Can I take it that you understand my position from the way I answered the same question?

Yes, and I explained why your position is based on a false premise (_ie._ that more than half of your atoms remain in your body for your lifespan.)

> [@](#):
>
> May I assume that you believe that (with regard to the topic at hand) there is a difference between:
> 
> 1. You and your duplicate
> 2. You and your identical twin
> 
> So far as your POV (sense of self, feeling of being “me”…etc)?

No, because my identical twin has **different memories** , starting from the difference in that he was born minutes before or after me and occupied a different point in space throughout childhood. The duplicate has _exactly the same_ memories as me, and therefore I continue _as_ him.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391/160 "2005-11-02T15:05:52Z")

</div>

Sorry, to clarify, **yes** I believe there **is** a fundamental difference between the duplicate and the natural identical twin in terms of “POV” (whatever that is).

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391.md?page=7)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-gotta-split-paradox/327391.md?page=9)