[extropy-chat] What should survive and why?

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On 01/05/07, Heartland <velvethum at hotmail.com> wrote:

Stathis writes :
> >> >> If I-now think I've survived as a continuation of I-before,
> >> >> then that's what matters in survival.
>
> Heartland replied:
> >> That doesn't matter at all. Why should it matter? Is there an argument
> for
> >> why this
> >> should matter? If it exists, I would love to read it.


Because that's how people define survival, as in not dying. If someone did
claim that sleep was death, the response would be, "No, I went to sleep last
night, and I don't feel dead; so whatever evidence you show suggesting that
everyone does die when they fall asleep, that just means your definition of
death is wrong, or at least different to what everyone in the history of the
world who ever thought about death understood by that term." It would be
like science discovering that cats and dogs are actually the same species:
we would still see them as distinct and would come up with a new definition
of species or subspecies to take the place of the old one.

Stathis responds:
> > The problem I have is with your definition of death.
>
> Stathis asks today:
> > You haven't answered yet (that I have noticed) what you would do if
> medical
> > science discovered that you didn't actually survive a situation you
> hitherto
> > believed harmless, such as falling asleep or being photographed by a
> traffic
> > camera.
>
> Can you please answer my questions first? After all, I asked you first.
> Thanks.
>

(Sorry, I thought I was answering it - see above).

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070501/a81bf02f/attachment.html>