[ExI] No gods, no meaning?

[John Clark]

On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 3:31 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:


> *> Actually, it turns out that all anthropic reasoning implicitly assumes
> open individualism; you can't make probabilistic statements concerning
> observers if you reject it.*
>

I can make operational statements, if I go into a casino and follow
probabilistic
rules I will lose less money than you will if you don't follow those rules.
And if I don't know what you're thinking then saying we have the same mind
doesn't mean much.

> *Finally, it is also the simplest theory consistent with the facts that
> answers survival questions like split brains, faulty transporters,
> consciousness mergers, duplications, clones, etc. The psychological and
> physiological continuity theories each have their breaking points which
> leads to absurdities.*
>

When technology becomes advanced enough to actually do those things,
probably in less than a century and possibly much less, we will see some
very odd things radically different from anything we're accustomed to
today. If you want to call those strange things absurd that's your option
but the point is they would not be paradoxes, they would not produce
logical contradictions. They would just be very odd, and the universe
doesn't care if we think something is odd or not.

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200426/7492e33d/attachment.htm>