Star Trekkin’
Across the universe
Boldly going forward
'Cause we can’t find reverse
How would my personal and private knowledge be transferred to an imposter?
The thing is, once the transfer process becomes good enough, it stops bothering me.
To take a (relatively absurd) extreme: if you could somehow impress my brain patterns directly onto the brain of the imposter, destroying his own mind, memories, and intelligence, wholly replacing it with my own, then I would be willing to say that he is “me” to a certain degree. He not only knows what I know, but thinks what I think, feels, believes, and acts the way I would feel, believe, and act. It would serve as a “lifeboat” if I were dying in a house-fire or the like. It isn’t as good as a proper transporter, but it would preserve “my” life.
(Alluded to in the Star Trek movies where Spock piggybacks his mind on McCoy’s brain.)
I just don’t believe that “an actor” can do this. He would have to sacrifice his life, and I don’t think the Screen Actors’ Guild is going to sign off on it.
Your scenario didn’t go far enough, and thus I reject it. Once you take the argument far enough, I do accept it. But you have to accept my definition of “far enough.” You can’t produce a scenario that doesn’t go far enough, and then say, “See? You have to accept this.” No, I don’t. I accept my own beliefs, not your variants upon them.
Okay, and, as above, if you take it far enough – directly scanning and fully imprinting my brain patterns on some other brain – then, yeah, I do accept it. That new mind would be “me.” It would be indistinguishable from a brain transplant. (As I mentioned earlier, there was a Jack Vance story with that theme, as well as innumerable TV shows with mind-swap events.)
It just has to fit my terms of “far enough” and not someone else’s.
In the meantime, we can’t help but see some appeal to “soul” in their arguments, strive as they will to deny that it is the basis of their reasoning.
There seems to be a painful lot of projection going on, which, I think, only shows how very deep the philosophical divide is. I can’t reproduce their reasoning without committing errors; they can’t reproduce ours without committing errors. When I make an analogy, they reject it; when they make an analogy, we reject it. The entire process of knowledge underlies the difference.
It’s fascinating… Frustrating, but fascinating!
“. . . But cannot find a parking place. Highly illogical!”
Well, yes, I figured that would be sufficiently obvious from context that I did not need to state it explicitly.
My bad.
I’m honestly not sure why. The nature of consciousness is defined in the premise itself: it’s something that can be easily copied and reproduced, to a sufficiently high degree of fidelity that the reproduction cannot tell that it’s a reproduction. More information might prove or disprove* parts of that premise, but that’s entirely different from being able to judge the premise as presented.
*almost certainly the latter
Actually, strike that last bit. I lost the context for a bit there, and thought you were talking about something else.
I mentioned this thread to my sister, and she said, “My God! You’re arguing over what the definition of ‘is’ is!”
Geez OK, I would call that case closed then. I completely understand your point of view, but I would never accept it for myself. To all of us anti-transporter folks, we hear the pro-transporter folks saying they have no problem whatsoever with snuffing out their own consciousness. It is baffling, but ok, if that’s how you feel, I can’t change your mind, apparently. I wish you were enjoying life more, I guess, and felt more strongly about sticking around?
Actually… what if every day was like living your ultimate fantasy, whatever that may be? You have accomplished everything you wanted to on earth, and you can just enjoy yourself and the people around you 24/7. Now would you happily step into the disintegrate and copy machine??
If you and I were facing certain death, but had access to a teleporter to escape it, it’d be me saying the same thing about you afterward.
No, you obviously do not understand my point of view, to mischaracterize it that baldly.
My consciousness (in my opinion and belief) is not snuffed out. That’s your opinion, but it isn’t mine. Will you kindly stop projecting your beliefs onto others? It’s a really crummy mode of debate!
ETA: However, agreed, case closed. The wheels are spinning, but the airplane ain’t lifting off the treadmill.
Only because we have a different definition of the word “my”. To me, “my” is only associated with the locus of my experience – my POV. To you, an exact duplicate’s POV is good enough for you to call it “my”.
If it was death or transporter, sure I’d step in. But only for the benefit of my loved ones. I wouldn’t get anything out of it.
By you telling them, as part of the training process?
Thank you for engaging the intent of the premise instead of getting hung up on the details of the accomplishment of the premise.
I was avoiding saying brain scan and whatnot, because I wanted to avoid the notion of essentially doing a brain transplant or brain transport. I wanted a separate biological body conformed to behave and act just like you. So we take the brain pattern and duplicate it, not relocate it
That is really the essense of the distinction I am trying to explore. We are duplicating the pattern, not relocating the pattern.
So yes, a version of Irishman would continue to exist, and maybe even have the same level of claim to being Irishman, but he wouldn’t be the Irishman in this skull.
All of this in service of the claim that you would be happy that Trinopus could continue in your place, so you would have no qualms terminating the Trinopus over here, the one whose eyes you are looking out.
That’s what I find bizarre.
Absolutely. I wouldn’t suggest otherwise.
I didn’t mean to suggest you were claiming a telepathic link. Rather, I was trying to state that I think that is what it would take to convince me that my consciousness, my POV, was really located. I would need to experience the relocation. Without that, there’s this nagging doubt that I’m going to just end. Sure, there will be an Irishman, but not me.
But that is the very point.
I’m not sure what you meant by “strike the last bit”.
Yes, the copy cannot tell himself apart. The question to me is did my consciousness move, or get duplicated? That’s probably the simplest and clearest way to express the concern.
ABSOLUTELY! 
I’d probably get into the transporter. I’m just not sure I would make it out, or if it would be a copy of me who was glad he got in the transporter.
Exactly; the whole thing collapses to a personal philosophical viewpoint that cannot be further reduced or analyzed. It’s like a pro-choice/pro-life debate talking about what a “person” is. It’s like Coke/Pepsi, Ford/Chevy, PC/Mac, or Addams/Munsters!
(Don’t care, don’t care, don’t care, and Addams all the way!)
My God! It’s full of STARS!