A view on cryonics (was Re: [extropy-chat] Bad Forecasts!)

[Slawomir Paliwoda]

> > I want people  to think about identity from the perspective
> > of subjective experience rather  than from the perspective
> > of memories and personalities.
>
> Your memories and that bundle of mental abilities and emotions we call
> personality are subjective experience and they are the only part of me
that
> I really want to survive;

Your memories and mental abilities are merely your data, or *pattern*, which
is static, while subjective experience is part of a dynamic *process* that
executes on that pattern. Your thoughts and consciousness are not a function
of a static pattern, but a function of the process that this pattern enters
into.


> > The error in your reasoning is the phrase "instantly swapped
> > the location of  you and the copy". You can't just "instantly"
> > swap matter in space-time.
>
> I said “instantly” just for simplicity, my thought experiment does not
> require it; I can take as much time as I want to  swap every atom in your
> body with the original Slawomir Paliwoda standing next to you. There is no
> way my making such a switch can make the slightest difference either
> objectively or subjectively and there is no way you can tell if I really
did
> anything at all because one hydrogen atom is identical to another.


But gradually swapping the atoms is not the same as swapping the location of
a mind, which makes it a completely different experiment.

If, by "swapping location", you meant gradual swapping of atoms, then the
way to verify the originality of my mind would be the same as before,
namely, by tracking the location of my mind process in space-time.

Whether the atoms that make up my mind substrate come from my copy or other
source is completely irrelevant to my identity as long as they don't destroy
my mind process. My identity remains the same even if "new" atoms in my
brain completely replace the "old" ones. By focusing exclusively on the
process allows me a complete disregard for the nature, or source, of my mind
substrate. As long as the integrity of that process is preserved, I'm fine.


> > will carve a unique trajectory in space-time. Because there can
> > only be one and only one such trajectory, it is possible to
> > track the identity of any object.
>
> That “unique trajectory” is more like a dog’s breakfast because all the
> atoms in your body and brain are in a constant flux, you are quite
literally
> not the man you were a year ago.


No. I'm not talking about the trajectory of atoms that make up the mind's
substrate, but a trajectory of a mind process. There's a huge difference
between the two.


> > Suppose the location of any mind in the future is recorded using 4
> > parameters (x,y,z,t).
>
> That is one of your errors right there, asking for the coordinates of a
mind
> is like asking where “red” is or “fast” or “big”.


Unlike "red", any mind is a tangible process. It's an activity of matter
whose
position in space-time can be measured.


> > Therefore, I will be able to prove my originality by presenting
> > the log detailing locations of my mind in space and time,
>
> I’m not saying you can’t devise a thought experiment where you can
determine
> who is the original and who is the copy, I’m saying you can also devise
ones
> where you can not.


Whatever these experiments might be, I'm afraid they would have to violate
the laws of physics first to prove that verification of identity is
impossible.


> Thought experiment:
>
> You and the original (or you and the copy, hard to say) are standing next
to
> each other. I flip a coin and then take out my Magnum 44 and shoot one of
> you in the head. I then bring out a sealed envelope containing the only
log
> that can prove definitely who was the copy and who was the original and
hand
> it to  the one I did not shoot. You (the survivor) feel fine happy and
> healthy, you feel just like you remember feeling in the past, so do you
open
> the envelope or burn it? And if you open it and find you are the copy is
> there any reason to be distressed?


Obviously, this experiment does not attempt to show that verification of
identity is impossible. Instead, it merely poses a personal question how the
survivor would feel about after verifying its true identity. And the answer
is that, in any case, the survivor should feel very lucky.



> > My point is that two *different* objects cannot occupy
> >the same location in space and time.
>
> That’s only true of things that obey The Pauli Exclusion Principle and not
> everything does.  Two different photons of light can occupy the same
> location in space and time, but it doesn’t really matter because mind is
not
> an object.

Electrons flowing through the brain are not matter?

Slawomir