Re: Uploading (Who is Who?)

Reality (
Thu, 27 Mar 1997 17:40:18 -0600 (CST)

On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 wrote:

["]>Both are now faced with major problems.
["]>Which one of us is married?
["]>Who goes to work on Monday,
["]>In my case the original probably does.
["]>Of course neither are the same person that existed in that past,
["]>but if I were the copy I would let the copied assume responsiblity
["]>for the past, unless it was not so inclined to do so.
["]This brings to mind an interesting question. Is the clone to be held
["]responsible for crimes (real crimes, like murder) which were committed by the
["]"original" sometime just prior to duplication? For example, if I murdered my
["]wife (I wouldn't & I'm not currently married, but for the sake of an
["]example...), and then I duplicated myself, and then the law enforcement
["]officers (whatever kind then exists) arrive to arrest the perpatrator, who do
["]they arrest? I ask because if the answer is that only the original is
["]arrested, then criminal types by the dozens would flock to duplication
["]chambers everywhere, as to avoid (at least on one line of existence)
["]prosicution. On the other hand, if both the "original" and the cloned copy
["]were to be prosicuted, then they would need to be put on trial together, a
["]"strange" arrangement. Any comments or answers?

I would say that they would both be accountable for their past actions
(before the cloning), so therefore they should both be put on trial
together. Furthermore, I think that the resources of the original should
be divided equally with the clone, as the clone was just as responsible
for achiveing the wealth as the original.

["]On another note, I believe the entire idea of punishment as it is known today
["]will one day become obsolete. When you "punish" someone, it does not improve
["]or change the crime that has been committed. The real answer, I believe,
["]lies is changing the fundamental reason the crime was committed (I mean real
["]crime - force, fraud, coercion), thus preventing future crimes, while
["]maintaining the person's ability to be a productive individual. In our
["]techno-advanced future, these crimes will be eliminated by neural
["]restructuring or some such thing. This may bring up the question of prisons
["]in the future, before everyone has been "uncriminalized", would it be
["]permissable, or objectively OK, to make neural modifications by force to
["]criminals? This would be preferable, I believe, to death or prison. I hope
["]this brings many comments. Thanks for listening.

For serious offenses, prison with the option of assisted suicide is the
most humane thing to do. As for neural modifications, I would doubt that
they would be effective, without destroying the victims personality.
I see this as not only death, but perhaps torture as well.

["]Shawn Johnson
["]e-mail to:
["]My favorite quote:"Condemnation without investigation is the height of
["]Anyone know where that quote came from? I forgot. Thanks.


"...And you know they'll never find us, and they'll leave us alone, and if
we just keep on talking then we'll still make it home."

- Orbital, "The Box"