My vote is for #4. The clone is not the king, any more than my identical twin is me. The reincarnation is not the king, at best she’s a copy of some important aspects of him, at worst she’s a fraud. Same goes for the robot. The frozen corpse, on the other hand, is demonstrably the king’s body, has all the physical aspects of his memory and personality stored within it, and, best of all, is in no condition to interfere with the democratic running of the country by leaving any more phenomenally stupid wills. Give the crown to the corpse, and the power to the people!
Allow me to be the first to go for number 1.
The “reincarnation” is not the king. Clearly, even if reincarnation did happen, you don’t just reincarnate as yourself. On that basis the king could just as easily been a reincarnation of a peasant and not the rightful king anyway.
The robot is not the king. Where’s the proof that the robot is conscious, and not a mere simulation?
The corpse is the king, but the lawyer priests aren’t. The king has had 30 years to come back to life, and hasn’t managed it. I think he’s missed his chance.
Now the clone isn’t the king either, but being effectively the king’s identical twin, is the heir. So it doesn’t matter what the king said on his death bed, the clone takes the throne by the usual method of succession.
So, if the Dalai Lama was cloned, would he have a Buddha nature? (For that matter, would his dog’s clone have a Buddha nature?)
The above is, of course, assuming that the Dalai Lama has a Buddha nature, or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof. (And really, is a clone any weirder a method for choosing head of state than the method for a lama?)
I think the answer is 1. The key to remember is that the king is a Raelian, and thus his definition of “him” is going to be the adherent to the Raelian philosophy. I slogged through their web site (good Lord, why do I do these things to myself?) and found quotes adressing each option.
Let’s go through the options one by one. Starting with number two
“There is no soul, but there is a marvelous genetic program” Since there is no soul, there is no reincarnation. 'nuff said.
**“The awakening of the body goes hand in hand with the awakening of the spirit. By neglecting one’s body, the mind is also being put to sleep.” You can’t neglect your body any more than leaving it completely. A disembodied mind residing in a computer is only computer code -The Raelians have a real hard on for DNA and would consider the silicon version merely a simulacrum and not the King himself
This one’s a bit tricky, because it’s obviously him - he’s just dead. My argument against this option would be the quotes: “Man is linked to the infinite which surrounds and composes him by his captors, the senses” and
“To meditate is to put our body in harmony with the infinite environment which surrounds and composes us, so that the mind benefits from the greatest comfort to develop its inner feelings and creativity.” If the King is dead, but preserved - He isn’t really at harmony with the environment. Additionally, since his nonfuctional brain has no senses or meditation ability, the body is disconnected from the infinite and is nothing more than a hunk of meat.
This brings us to my vote, number 1
“There is no soul in us. There is a biological program, comparable to computer instructions, which make us human and capable to enact rules of society.”
The King’s DNA code is what makes him human, it is what makes him him. He is his DNA and his DNA is him. Since the clone has the same DNA as the king, he is the king. According to the Raelians, twins would be the same person too.
Think of it this way. You buy a customizable operating system for your computer called King 1.0. One day your computer crashes and you need to reload the operating system but, *gasp, *the CD has been destroyed. You go to the store to get a new CD. You buy the same one. Two copies - same one. You install King 1.0. The new code in your computer hasn’t gone through the same customizations as the first one, yet, but it is still King 1.0. It is not the CD’s that make King 1.0 what it is, it’s the code.
[quoteSo, if the Dalai Lama was cloned, would he have a Buddha nature? (For that matter, would his dog’s clone have a Buddha nature?)
The above is, of course, assuming that the Dalai Lama has a Buddha nature, or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof. (And really, is a clone any weirder a method for choosing head of state than the method for a lama?)[/quote]
Mu!!
Even if 1, 2, or 3 really is “me”, they have to prove it.
I suspect the priests could draw out that process for about as long as they want.
4 by default.
Yes?