[ExI] Plastination

[Mike Dougherty]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> On 02/02/2011 08:16 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:50 AM, Eugen Leitl<eugen at leitl.org>  wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 07:30:17PM -0800, Amara D. Angelica wrote:
>>>> 5. Cryopreservation inherently destroys subatomic and quantum data.
>>> Oh, you're one of those.
>> That's a rather impolite way to agree there exists a difference of
>> opinion.
>
> Really?  Isn't that a matter of interpretation?  I read it as simply "I am
> not one of those and do not wish to delve into that position or why I am not
> at this time."  Perfectly fair and reasonable.  And arguably "nicer" than
> just ignoring those arguments entirely.

Yes it is a matter of interpretation.

I should not have used the declarative "that is ... impolite" any more
than Eugen should declare "you are one"

Perhaps we both could use language like, "I perceive this instance to
be of a particular type"

Though in a conversation where quantum data has suspected relevance to
personal identity continuity there might be too much ambiguity over "I
perceive" and "a particular type."

this is probably a meta-topic that has been equally done to death...
or done to near-death, frozen, thawed then rehashed with little
result.  :)

sorry, "warmed"