Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 129 posts

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#111

Post by noxer »

yMEyUyNE1 wrote: post #95
pkulak wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still have lots of cells in common. But point still taken.

I think they are refering to the phenomenon of "Each and every cell of our body is replaced after a period of 7-10 years which means we renew." https://www.questdiagnostics.com/patients/blog/articles/do-m...

Its a common myth that our cells all die and are replaced by new ones, but that is not actually true, it is true for the vast majority of cells tho.

One of the most extreme example where this is not true, are the female gametes aka the egg cells. They are all created before birth and are never replaced. Quite the opposite of the male counterpart where the production of gametes starts 10+ year after birth and usually continues for the rest of the life.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#112

Post by prometheus76 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #69
mankyd wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposite. It's identity is really an "event" called the ship of Theseus. The effect continues to happen regardless of the specific matter.

That's fine to define a start event, but where does it end ? Is the universe the ship of Theseus at some point ?

When no one remembers the name of the ship.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#113

Post by Geisterde »

prometheus76 wrote: post #61
labster wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what do you mean Santa is a fantasy character? Are you implying the big jolly red man isn’t real?

The identity of Santa transcends one body, but his identity manifests in many bodies. If someone is dressed as Santa and you wave and he says "ho ho ho!" you say "hi Santa!" But if you wave and he says "leave me alone. My wife left me last night," then it is suddenly clear you are no longer talking to Santa, but instead to a guy dressed as Santa, but who is having a bad day. Just because Santa's identity transcends o…

I had a philosophy proffessor in school that shared this prespective; ill never forget the arguement I had with him, at one point I said "he doesnt bring you presents", to which he replied "he brings me presents, thats your problem!", it still cracks me up thinking about it.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#114

Post by prometheus76 »

Geisterde wrote: post #113
prometheus76 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The identity of Santa transcends one body, but his identity manifests in many bodies. If someone is dressed as Santa and you wave and he says "ho ho ho!" you say "hi Santa!" But if you wave and he says "leave me alone. My wife left me last night," then it is suddenly clear you are no longer talking to Santa, but instead to a guy dressed as Santa, but who is having a bad day. Just because Santa's identity transcends o…

I had a philosophy proffessor in school that shared this prespective; ill never forget the arguement I had with him, at one point I said "he doesnt bring you presents", to which he replied "he brings me presents, thats your problem!", it still cracks me up thinking about it.

It's the same thinking behind the phrase uttered when a king died: "The king is dead! Long live the king!" The person embodying the identity of the king is mortal and has died, but the identity of the king lives on and will be embodied by another mortal person soon.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#115

Post by amai »

_8j50 wrote: post #76

Just like the article, the ship of Theseus changes in its constituency but not in its identity. Am I a different person because almost none of my cells at the time of my birth remain in me? Of course not. And the wiki article is the same article. Whether something can be identified as a specific thing is a matter of social convention. A transformation of something is not a new thing but exactly the former: a transorm…

> ship of Theseus changes in its constituency

Does it? Atoms and electrons are indistinguishable so much that physicists argued that every electron is actually the same single electron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#117

Post by mankyd »

makeitdouble wrote: post #69
mankyd wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposite. It's identity is really an "event" called the ship of Theseus. The effect continues to happen regardless of the specific matter.

That's fine to define a start event, but where does it end ? Is the universe the ship of Theseus at some point ?

[Disclaimer: I am not a philosopher]

The ship can shrink as much as it can grow. If you replace a wooden plank on it, the discarded wood is no longer part of it. And if you disassemble it entirely, the "event" is no longer happening, and the ship no longer exists.

It's analogous to any other "real event" you might think of. If you have a party, it starts when people show up and ends when people leave. Guests can come and go all the while.

The point isn't to define a strict beginning and end, however. It's to point out that the ship isn't defined by its original parts. It's defined by the confluence of parts that continuously exist and are recognized as being a cohesive entity.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#118

Post by prometheus76 »

AnAaaaardvark wrote: post #83

It's almost like intangible social constructs don't really exist or something. As long as you do not know the thing in itself, how do you know it's really there?

Identities exist and are associated with the material world, but are not directly tied to it. "The king is dead! Long live the king!" illustrates this perfectly. The mortal person who has been embodying the identity of "king" has died, but the identity of "king" persists and will be embodied by a different person soon.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#119

Post by cscurmudgeon »

willis936 wrote: post #110
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Your stance is something that people take when they don't understand the Hard Problem of consciousness. They don't try to understand hard problem of consciousness and just try to strawman the whole thing down by tying it to mysticism. Physicists like Penrose are not morons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness I seriously doubt Westworld writers were aware of the hard problem of con…

>Your stance is something that people take when they don't understand the Hard Problem of consciousness. Do you also think the 30% of philosophers who also have this stance simply don't understand it? The only one calling anyone a moron here is you, and I don't think anyone involved in this discussion actually is. It's a cheap trick to discredit an opinion you disagree with.

Maybe you should reread your first comment?

> Do you also think the 30% of philosophers who also have this stance simply don't understand it?

Almost none of those philosophers accuse proponents of the hard problem of consciousness with dabbling in mysticism.

> The only one calling anyone a moron here is you, and I don't think anyone involved in this discussion actually is. It's a cheap trick to discredit an opinion you disagree with.

You equated people that find consciousness hard with people being scared of the conclusions. You are essentially saying that those people are not intellectually strong as you.

Re: 0% of the phrases of the original Wikipedia "Ship of Theseus" article remain

#120

Post by DiscourseFan »

thiht wrote: post #109
DiscourseFan wrote: post #17

From the first reply to the Mastadon post linked by u/manicennui: >@mori@mastodon.au @wikipedia And yet, the Ship of Theseus page remains, thus proving a bird in the hand is worth two stitches in time.

Tiny heads-up: it’s "MastOdon" not "MastAdon". Seems like a common mistake

Thanks
Post reply on HN