>From: "John Clark" <jonkc@worldnet.att.net>
>
>Mark Gubrud <mgubrud@squid.umd.edu> Wrote:
>
> >Each of us exists AT THE PRESENT MOMENT as a unique physical
> >construction of atoms.
>
>That happens to be true, but it expresses no profound truth, it's just an
>accident
>of history. No reason to expect it always to be true.
>
> > It is possible to say this, but that does not make it unambiguous.
>For
> >example, what if you make two copies simultaneously? Which one,
> >then is "you"?
>
>Only one way to tell, ask them. I'll bet you already know what they'll say.
>Your entire paragraph of rhetorical questions, that I'll reframe from
>quoting,
>can be answered if you just stop thinking of yourself as a noun. You are
>an adjective, an adjective modifying matter.
Right. It's all semantics anyway. If "you" means your *exact* atomic or
neuroligical make-up, then there is no such thing as you, because you are
constantly changing. The "you" who was you yesterday no longer exists and
there is a new "you" living in your house and driving your car today.
You can look at yourself in the mirror and at a 10 year old picture of
yourself and call them both "you" *only* because there have been no
duplicates made of the 10 year old you. If an exact copy of you were ever
made, *both* copies would be you, but only for the microsecond that they
both had the exact atomic or neuroligical make-up as the "original" you.
But the minute the first atom changed location, or the first cell died, or
the next synapse was formed, neither of them would be "you" and you would
have ceased to exist.
-Zero
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
--Thomas Jefferson
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:06:50 MDT