philisophical question.
- Thread starter Captain_Crunch
- Start date
flaming june
Registered Member
i was not refering to the main topic, and i wasn't telling about it but i was asking about it. i wanted to know if your body did stop and what if it did. and changes that might occur if it did (like being frozen just on a faster process.. which was mentioned earlier which is what i was actually what i was refering to in my previous post because i read someone's post about it)
start a new thread. 
Lord Nikon
Registered Member
transporting business
with regards to capt's original question, i believe there are (as ever) two possible answers:
1.) Biologically they would be identical in every aspect so YES, the entity down on the planet would be you.
2.) However, pschologically, they would be different. This is because the entity down on the planet has (as i assume it) lived a (at least partially) different life to the person being transported. This in turn means that they will have had different exeriences and this, i believe is what defines and carves a pesron.
It all falls down to how you choose to define the turm person.
fini.
PS: my first podt.....how exciting!
with regards to capt's original question, i believe there are (as ever) two possible answers:
1.) Biologically they would be identical in every aspect so YES, the entity down on the planet would be you.
2.) However, pschologically, they would be different. This is because the entity down on the planet has (as i assume it) lived a (at least partially) different life to the person being transported. This in turn means that they will have had different exeriences and this, i believe is what defines and carves a pesron.
It all falls down to how you choose to define the turm person.
fini.
PS: my first podt.....how exciting!
You are all incorrect
You have to further qualify the question before a real answer would be even fathomable. The word replicate implies an exact copy. An exact copy would be you. It would be identical to you in every way. The copy would hence be you, however you are still you too. Therefore, there would at that point be two yous. As a matter of fact the two yous would be individuals both starting as you but becoming individuals due to the subjective nature of consciousness. If one were to in some way "destroy" the orginal you (the one that would still be you that is (and to you, the other would be somone else entirely however to him it would seem likewise)) it would be murder.
If perchance you are really meaning the star trek theory, that is different. There I believe the premise is matter to energy conversion and it is implied that you retain your original energy thereby your original matter as well.
What do you think aboot that there?
You have to further qualify the question before a real answer would be even fathomable. The word replicate implies an exact copy. An exact copy would be you. It would be identical to you in every way. The copy would hence be you, however you are still you too. Therefore, there would at that point be two yous. As a matter of fact the two yous would be individuals both starting as you but becoming individuals due to the subjective nature of consciousness. If one were to in some way "destroy" the orginal you (the one that would still be you that is (and to you, the other would be somone else entirely however to him it would seem likewise)) it would be murder.
If perchance you are really meaning the star trek theory, that is different. There I believe the premise is matter to energy conversion and it is implied that you retain your original energy thereby your original matter as well.
What do you think aboot that there?
Suppose the transporter beams down two copies by mistake. Person P exists on the planet after being beamed down. Person Q is a mile away from person P, also having just beamed down. Persons P and Q will both claim to be the person R who existed before the split, and both have an equally flawless claim to it. Yet it's clear that no one is going to be conscious of what both of the pairs of eyes a mile apart are seeing, so there are undoubtedly two distinct conscious beings. This means that if we're to consider person R to still exist, they can't both be person R since they're distinct individuals. Yet if person X exists back on the transporter platform never having been destroyed, we can't really justify person X as having any better a claim to being person R than persons P and Q have. (The only unique feature of X is four dimensional continutity with R, but it's not as though we say a person is the big bang because they have four dimensional continuity with that [or a part of that, if we could speak of parts there].)
It seems we just can't find person R. We know person R was a conscious individual, and we know that P, Q and X are conscious individuals which have properties in common with R, but all we've got is a bunch of distinct individuals who we can properly say all used to be R.
Perhaps there's just nothing to the concept of personal identity over time anyhow, other than memory creating an illusion of it. Not a comfortable thought, but it's hard to rule it out. This would mean that person R simply doesn't exist for more than an indefinable moment anyhow, regardless of the transporter.
It seems we just can't find person R. We know person R was a conscious individual, and we know that P, Q and X are conscious individuals which have properties in common with R, but all we've got is a bunch of distinct individuals who we can properly say all used to be R.
Perhaps there's just nothing to the concept of personal identity over time anyhow, other than memory creating an illusion of it. Not a comfortable thought, but it's hard to rule it out. This would mean that person R simply doesn't exist for more than an indefinable moment anyhow, regardless of the transporter.