On 4/10/2015 6:03 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 3 Oct 2015, at 5:21 PM, Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au <mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:
On 3/10/2015 1:52 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 2 Oct 2015, at 4:28 PM, Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

I think you are continuing to confuse the issues between local copies, obeying the laws of physics and information transfer, and remote copies outside our particle horizon. The latter are of absolutely no relevance to me here-and-now because there is no possibility of information transfer.

Remote copies are still copies. If a copy of you were made in the Andromeda Galaxy a billion years hence, it would still *by definition* think it was you despite being made of different matter, despite it being far removed in space and time, despite it possibly having no physical connection with you.
That is still within the forward light cone, so information could be transmitted. Information is physical. If there is no transfer of information, there is no way one could test what the copy thought.

Are you saying that the copy would not really be a copy until it verified this by establishing contact with the original, or that the mere possibility of establishing contact with the original is necessary and sufficient?

You would no know you had a copy until the two were compared -- and that involves the transfer of information.

Alternatively, what could it possibly mean for the 'copy' to think -- I am the person that was born in another galaxy a million years ago? Perhaps people think crazy things like that all the time, but they are usually put away so that they can do no more harm to themselves.

A lot of people believe that they are someone else, and they are deluded, because it isn't possible in the world we live in. They would not necessarily be deluded if it were possible.
Even if copies were possible, being deluded would also be possible. We would only ever be able to tell the difference by checking our thoughts against independent evidence from the world around us, other people, etc, etc.

None of these checks is possible for purported copies outside our light cone, or at remote times and locations.

Suppose you're told that according whatever criteria you have defined you were *inadequately* copied last night in your sleep. You believe you're Bruce Kellett, have his memories, look like him, and everyone who knew Bruce agrees that he seems to be the same guy. However, the atoms just weren't put in place using the right procedure, whatever that might be. What difference does the knowledge of this deficit make to you? What difference does it make to anyone else?

How does such an implausible scenario differ from the observation that I sloughed off some flakes of skin during the night, some cells died, and some new cells grew, nourished by the food I ate for dinner last night? Minor changes do not disrupt bodily continuity, and all these changes are subject to the laws of physics, so are completely traceable and understandable.

Yes, but as far as I can tell you think that there is some possible scenario where your psychological continuity is preserved in the sense I have described but physical continuity is not preserved.
No, I don't think that. I think 'psychological continuity' is an empty phrase when there is no physical information transfer.

So this is exactly what I am asking you to consider. Someone who looks like you, behaves like you, knows everything that you know, etc. wakes up in your bed this morning. Overnight, some physical changes have occurred. If you (the person waking up in your bed) are informed that these changes consist of a few cells dying and being replaced, you are not worried. But what if you are reliably informed that the physical changes involve a random process, or something else that would render 'psychological continuity' an empty phrase, as you say. You (the person waking up in your bed) still feel the same either way, and everyone who knows you agrees you seem to be the same person. Would you go around claiming that you were not Bruce, or that you are Bruce but have experienced a psychological discontinuity, or that you haven't experienced a psychological discontinuity because it's meaningless, or what?

Psychological continuity is empty in many of the cases you propose because no independent checking is possible. Psychological continuity, if interpreted to mean only some commonality of memories, temperament and the like, might have some content as part of the muli-dimensional character of personal identity. But it is by no means sufficient, and possibly (in extreme cases) not even necessary.

Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to