Re: Is the fourth time is the charm?

From: Michael S. Lorrey (
Date: Fri May 19 2000 - 11:04:36 MDT

John Clark wrote:

> m <> Wrote:
> >and the majority of atoms will remain at each stage for what it's worth
> In the first place that depends on the arbitrary definition of how long
> "each stage" is, so the statement is not useful. In the second place it
> implies that there are special John Clark hydrogen atoms and special
> Harvey Newstrom hydrogen atoms which renders the statement silly.

There is an assembly of atoms that is necessary to the maintainance and stability of the
ongoing emergent phenomenon that is my conciousness. Now, copying that conciousness by
non-destructive or destructive means creates a conciousness on another substrate that
beleives it is the first conciousness, however the only valid opinion on this matter
ultimately is that of the original conciousness. John seems to be skating out from under
the limits of this by either destroying the original conciousness in, i.e. destroying
evidence, or by contesting that it doesn't matter, that its all solipsistic, that so
long as we all can't tell the difference that it doesn't matter. While I would like
reality to be as John describes, I have strong suspicions that it is not so, and that
John's arguments are merely a cop out to avoid the issue, and is being smug about it
because at this point in time, we cannot know one way or the other.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:25 MDT