[extropy-chat] Let's try this again.

[A B]

Hi Samantha,
   
  Samantha wrote:
  "...adds nothing of value to our knowledge and does not add to the ability to make sense of our world..."
   
  With all due respect, this is *your* opinion, not mine, and probably not the opinion of several other people on this list - judging from the level of activity that this thread has produced.
   
  I've already listed some direct implications that this conclusion would carry (if true), in a much earlier post, but I've thought of a couple more since then:
   
  -  It would carry mutual (bi-directional) implications with the Many Worlds QM theory.
   
  -  It would suggest that people who die in this era (without cryopreservation) will not  
     be "resurrected" by SIs of the future: because it lies outside their abilities or 
     desires, or because we fall to an existential risk before the Singularity occurs.
   
  -  If proven true, it might encourage some people of the strictly "Thread" view of life 
     to arrange for Cryonics, where otherwise they might not.
   
  Samantha:
  "...has nothing at all compelling to recommend it..."
   
  Your opinion again. I respectfully disagree.
   
  Best Wishes,
   
  Jeffrey Herrlich   
   
  Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
  
    On May 8, 2006, at 11:51 AM, A B wrote:

    Hi Samantha,
   
  It is equally inappropriate to claim that the idea is "nonsense", unless you have relevant evidence or a counter-argument. However, I agree that there are more pressing matters at this time.
   
  

  What do I mean by nonsense?  That which is counter to what we already regard as true within the context of our knowledge and which adds nothing of value to our knowledge and does not add to the ability to make sense of our world and which has nothing at all compelling to recommend it is nonsense.   Especially when it proclaims at length that it is the most accurate position to hold on the matters under consideration.   

  - samantha


    
Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
  
On May 8, 2006, at 6:59 AM, A B wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> John wrote:
> "Young? The idea that matter uniquely determines what we are is as 
> old as the
> hills, but discoveries in science made about 90 years ago proves 
> this can
> not possibly be true."...
>
> When I wrote "young", I was referring to this particular (new) 
> conclusion which is a mere few weeks old, as far as I can tell. I 
> doubt any philosopher from the past has stood before his peers and 
> claimed with a straight face: "Though I appear to you to be alive, 
> I actually died yesterday."
>
> John,
> "...the idea that the you of
> yesterday could be dead and you didn't even know it would have been 
> crazy."
>
> I've always acknowledged that the idea sounds "crazy". But that 
> alone is not solid grounds for dismissing it altogether.


In absence of a convincing argument, which certainly has not been 
provided, we have quite sufficient grounds for dismissing these 
assertions as nonsense. Can we move on to something productive now?

- samantha

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

  __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


		
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060509/74c235a5/attachment.html>