The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
1–10 of 92 posts
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#2"This seems really simple and obvious to me. So what am I missing?"
Personal identity is a deep philosophical problem - see Derek Parfit's 'Reasons and Persons'.
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#3Imagine that I visit a cloning facility that can flawlessly duplicate a human, memories and all. The techs there put me in a medical gown and sedate me, and a while later I wake up in an empty room.
Without any additional information, I have no way to determine if I am the clone or not. I know only that there is another me in the building somewhere, having the exact same thoughts as I am having right now.
In fact, I have no way to know if the cloning was even successful or not. There is no way for me to distinguish from this room if I am the clone, if the other copy was disintegrated, or if no copy was made at all. The room I'm in could be on Mars for all I know.
Does it make sense for me to worry about the fate of the other potential copy if I know absolutely that nothing of my essence has been lost either way?
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#4Another similar thought experiment is what happen if we cut ourselves laterally exactly in half and then fill back in the missing half on both parts. In the case of both halves, we are continuing an existing consciousness.
Would you be OK killing off one of the halves?
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#5The author seems to believe continuous consciousness is necessary for identity. I hope he never falls asleep. If he does that means he is dead, and tomorrow morning an usurper with his memories will wake up in his bed.
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#6Imagine that I visit a cloning facility that can flawlessly duplicate a human, memories and all. The techs there put me in a medical gown and sedate me, and a while later I wake up in an empty room. Without any additional information, I have no way to determine if I am the clone or not. I know only that there is another me in the building somewhere, having the exact same thoughts as I am having right now. In fact, I…
Look at it like this:
You are placed in a box. Moments later, you are told, "We have successfully made a copy of you. We are sending it home now. You must be disposed of."
Will you allow them to dispose of you?
This is the question being posed, not whether a copy will have no idea if it is the original. The point is that it isn't relevant if one is a copy. No one was moved, it's only that a second person now exists and killing either is murder of a unique person.
(Again, uniqueness is not a question of whether these people will think or react to situations in the same way, but rather that there are two different conciousnesses at play.)
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#7[deleted]
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#8Imagine that I visit a cloning facility that can flawlessly duplicate a human, memories and all. The techs there put me in a medical gown and sedate me, and a while later I wake up in an empty room. Without any additional information, I have no way to determine if I am the clone or not. I know only that there is another me in the building somewhere, having the exact same thoughts as I am having right now. In fact, I…
Sure, as much as it makes sense to worry about the fate of any other independent human being - and perhaps even more so, if you feel more affinity with your copies than you do with random strangers.
I wouldn't use a facility that killed a stranger at random every time I used it, and I sure as hell wouldn't use a facility if it killed a living person who was identical to me.
Frankly, I don't see what your 'essence' has to do with it. Killing people is morally wrong.
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#9The author of the article is asking a bit of a different question than the the authors of the articles he cites. The cited are more about "what is consciousness" in the context of can a computer be. The author is asking "what am I" That's a little harder isn't it?
He's asking if he got copied instantly and sent to Mars which one of the copies would still be me? Well, they both would wouldn't they? Each having a continuous experience leading up to the point they were copies and stepped out of the machine.
The fun part is that, barring quantum hooey that the articles bring up, there seems to be no scientific reason to doubt the physical possibility of this eventually occurring. If you can get copied, and both copies are you, what happens to the underpinnings of most world religions? Delightfully subversive thought right there.
Re: The Cloned-Consciousness-as-Continuous-Consciousness Fallacy
#10Imagine that I visit a cloning facility that can flawlessly duplicate a human, memories and all. The techs there put me in a medical gown and sedate me, and a while later I wake up in an empty room. Without any additional information, I have no way to determine if I am the clone or not. I know only that there is another me in the building somewhere, having the exact same thoughts as I am having right now. In fact, I…
This is all basic stuff. Think deeper.
You go to sleep every night. When you wake up the next day, how do you know you're the same person as yesterday? What does that mean?
Now consider if you didn't have memories of the past. What would make you "you"? The body would be the same but your amnesia would change things, eh?
Now what if you knew next week you would lose your memories for sure, but this week you can go on an amazing vacation. Does it matter where you go? It matters to your current self but to your future self.
Now think about sacrificing pleasure now so you can live a longer life. Or feel good about your life at 80.
Now think about the afterlife. What if you are reincarnated with no memories of the past? We already kind of established that "reincarnated you" wouldn't care about current you. But will current you care about reincarnated you?
Consider this: if a "future you" doesn't remember being "current you" how are they really different than a random person with a similar body who also has amnesia?
In short, long term, is it all about the memories?
What is the self preservation instinct about?
Finally the big one... if there were no conscious observers at all, in what sense would anything exist? That is, if I described to you a universe that you can never detect or deduce must exist from any observations in this one, how would saying "that universe EXISTS be different than saying it DOESN'T EXIST? It seems the word itself requires concious observers. Thus, the concept of consciousness and existence may be two sides of the same amazing conundrum.