[extropy-chat] Meta re recurring threads was Personal Identity Bis
hkhenson at rogers.com
Sun Apr 15 18:07:34 UTC 2007
At 11:19 AM 4/15/2007 +1000, you wrote:
>On 4/15/07, Keith Henson <<mailto:hkhenson at rogers.com>hkhenson at rogers.com>
>>Materialists, i.e., engineering types, for the most part agree with you
>>that an identical copy of a person (or a computer) is equivalent and for
>>the most part can't imagine why anyone would have a different opinion.
>You probably feel that way after these many long discussions.
It didn't take these long discussions. I have no memory of any time in the
past I had a different opinion, and my writings for the last two decades
are consistent with that view. For example:
http://www.alcor.org/cryonics/cryonics8610.txt starting at page 29.
>If you ask someone at random who has a scientific view of the world, it is
>not a foregone conclusion that he will agree. Perhaps that's unfortunate,
>but it's the way it is.
Few people with any experience expect uniformity in ideas between
people. I am sure there are people out there who expect we could find an
element between carbon and nitrogen (or a whole number between 6 and 7) if
we just looked hard enough. I can't imagine why someone would have such an
opinion, but I am not surprised to find such people. After all, number of
my friends used to think their spirits were brought to earth 75 million
years ago by Xenu.
More information about the extropy-chat