[ExI] No link between original and copy? Denied!

[Richard Loosemore]

Alan Grimes wrote:
> I'm feeling about ten different emotions about this subject simultaneously.
> 
> My post the other day had many intents, despite being written as a
> bedtime flash of inspiration.
> 
> First, as I have already shown, it effectively tricked the uploaders
> into arguing against their own fetish by forcing them to argue that no
> link of any kind exists between the original an the copy.

This is emphatically not true:  you must not have read my post carefully 
enough.

If the original is destroyed at the same time as the copy is made 
functional, this case is exactly equivalent to the case where the 
original you just sits there and nothing happens (except that you 
experience a sudden jump from the physical location of the original to 
the physical location of the copy).

If you insist on using your above phrasing to describe this case (You 
said "[I have forced the uploaders] to argue that no link of any kind 
exists between the original an the copy") then you are obliged to ALSO 
agree that there is no link of any kind between the you of now and the 
you of a few seconds from now.

Until you understand this fundamental point you will continue to be 
confused about the claims you are arguing against.



Richard Loosemore