[extropy-chat] I keep asking myself...

[ben]

A B <austriaaugust at yahoo.com> wrote:

> No problem. It wasn't so much a criticism, as it was a legitimate 
> (arguably) question of mine  ;-) I have another question though 
> (presented as an experiment). Lets say that in the future it becomes 
> possible to reversibly preserve a human (say through improved 
> vitrification). So I decide to be vitrified, a 'perfect' scan is made
>  of my brain, but is stored as information only (as a giant stack of 
> printed pages), not implemented. I'm revived from the vitrification
> and go about my daily life (which should be pretty awesome). But,
> alas, I get killed in an accident one hour after revival. Is it your
> belief (or anyone elses' here) that if my mind-information later gets
> implemented (let's say in the form of a physical replica, made of
> real atoms - not simulated), that I will "reawaken", and it will
> still be "me".
> 
> Just to save time I will provide my own answer here for the purpose 
> of discussion. For now, I will say the answer is: yes, it will be
> "me". But, if I choose to believe this, I don't see how that refutes
> the "hive-mind" idea. It would seem to support it even. The only way
> it would seem to refute the hive-mind idea, would be with the
> assertion that: for some reason, I can only experience *one* identity
> at a time and not many; why would this necessarily be the case (even
> in the absence of mind enhancements)?
> 
> But, you might easily be able convince me that the correct answer is:
>  no, it will not be "me".

First, you need to decide what you mean by 'me'.

This is difficult, i know, i've thought a lot about it and had many
discussions about it. In general, i'm a 'patternist', and think that any
exact copy of my mind-state is really 'me'. The difficulty is in
envisaging a number of different 'me's. Entirely separate, distinct
'me's, but all just as much 'me' as i am now. I picture a line, dividing
or branching as it goes forward. Each branch is a distinct individual,
all of them me. No mystical telepathic connection or anything. So they
are all 'A me'. The crucial thing is, there is then no 'real me' and
'false me's. They are all really me, and they are all at the same time
different people. A bit Zen, i know, but i just can't see any other way
of looking at it that makes sense.

So, in your scenario, the you that was vitrified, revived and repaired,
then later died, is one you. The other copy is also you. So 'you' do
survive, but not the 'you' that was woken from vitrification. That one 
is just as dead as any of us who dies at present.

Which is the 'real' you? That's a non-question. They both are.

Think of a clock. An old-fashioned one, with gears and springs, and a tick.
Think of the tick as being 'you'. If you exactly copy the clock, they
will both be indistinguishable, and both have the same tick. Not that
they share the same physical tick of course, but the separate tick they
each make is exactly the same.

And i realise that this will be an unsatisfactory answer to a lot of
people. Sorry, but that's all i've got. I've only got a small brain.
Thus far.

ben