There's a philosophical conundrum from antiquity (which name now
escapes me): Suppose you have a seaship. During its years of service,
every time a part breaks it's replaced by a new part. After sufficiently
time has passed, every single part of the original ship has been replaced
with a new part. So the question is: Is it still the same ship?

This question pertains to us really well. It's estimated that every single
molecule and atom in our bodies is recycled every about 7 years. In
other words, there's very few, if any, of the same atoms in your body
than there were 7 years ago.

So the question is: Given that probably you don't have even a single
atom in your body that you had 7 years ago, are you still the same person?

You could argue that even though your body may have been completely
recycled, your memories and thoughts have been retained, and these are
what makes you you.

But consider this: You have two computers that are otherwise completely
identical, except that there's data in the HD of one of the computers,
while the other's HD is empty. The data is now copied to that other
computer, making it identical. Is that other computer now the same one
as the original? Clearly not. It's just a copy of the original. It's not
physically the same.

Considering that, does that mean that I'm just a copy of myself of 7 years
ago? (And not even a perfect copy, because my thoughts and memories have
changed.) My whole body has physically changed so that not even a single
part is the same, and my memories have simply been "transferred" along.

So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
person?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

we're all of it.  We see these 3D slices of ourselves in the mirror and think
that's about it.  But really, we're more like a ball of yarn that has been
spread all around space from birth to death.

obviously, that's from a materialistic space-time perspective.  As for being one
thing or another philosophically, what is being besides a state?  To be or not
to be.  If you could erase the memory of a psychopath and give him instead happy
memory ones, would he be someone else?  Or would the same deplorable behavior
keep creeping in?

The ship is not made of the same materials just as we are not, yet it's sailed
be the same crew, has its masts and sails where they're supposed to be and bears
the same name.  That's all that matters.

The two computers are the same for all purposes, but separate by time and space
carry out different processes accessing different memory addresses.  Just like
twins.

Post a reply to this message

On 19/01/2014 12:56 AM, Warp wrote:

> This question pertains to us really well. It's estimated that every single
> molecule and atom in our bodies is recycled every about 7 years. In
> other words, there's very few, if any, of the same atoms in your body
> than there were 7 years ago.

So you're saying that even biology uses FP-style copy-on-write mutation? :-D

Post a reply to this message

> So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
> person?

Maybe an answer is that it's possible (or even normal?) to have a unique 
"item" represented by different actual matter at different points in 
time, but not at different points in space.

Also replacement parts (cells, molecules, ship parts) need some finite 
amount of time to become generally "accepted" (in a philosophical sense, 
not a scientific sense) as part of the original item. If you replace 
every part of your PC within 1 hour, then you've got a different PC and 
the "old" one is in a heap next to it. If you replace one part every 
year then in the end you might still say you've got the "same" PC. It's 
the constituent parts being together that make the item.

Post a reply to this message

On 19/01/2014 12:56 AM, Warp wrote:
> So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
> person?

What do you feel like, yourself?

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 19/01/14 00:56, Warp wrote:
> So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
> person?
> 

You are v1.01 RC1 of the previous version. All that happens is that a
few bugs get ironed out (and a few new ones introduced).

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 19/01/2014 12:56 AM, Warp wrote:
> > So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
> > person?

> What do you feel like, yourself?

I don't feel the same. I have learned new things, I have forgotten things,
I have changed my opinion on some things, and I look different.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> There's a philosophical conundrum from antiquity (which name now
> escapes me): Suppose you have a seaship. During its years of service,
> every time a part breaks it's replaced by a new part. After sufficiently
> time has passed, every single part of the original ship has been replaced
> with a new part. So the question is: Is it still the same ship?

Corollary:  You have a rock group called YES.  Over the years, band 
members come and go, up to the point where none of the original band 
members are still in the group.  Is that band still YES?

If the four original band members decide to record an album together 
again, can they also call themselves YES?


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 20/01/2014 2:06 PM, Warp wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 19/01/2014 12:56 AM, Warp wrote:
>>> So am I still the same person, or am I simply an (incomplete) copy of that
>>> person?
>
>> What do you feel like, yourself?
>
> I don't feel the same. I have learned new things, I have forgotten things,
> I have changed my opinion on some things, and I look different.
>

Okay. But does that not mean that you are only three dimensional?
Are /you/ not the sum of all your selves?
Like and with /time/ *you* move forward, extending yourself, growing, 
becoming what you will be.

<That reads like absolute tripe, some new age balderdash.
If you are not the you of your past. Can you beheld responsible for what 
you did in the past?>

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/01/2014 03:43 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:

> If the four original band members decide to record an album together
> again, can they also call themselves YES?

The answer is in the title. ;-)

Post a reply to this message