= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wnoise comments on The I-Less Eye - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (83)
I believe in continuity of substance, not similarity of pattern, as the basis of identity. If you are the original, that is what you are for all time. You cannot wake up as the copy. At best, a new mind can be created with false beliefs (such as false memories, of experiences which did not happen to it). Do I still face a problem of "subjective anticipation"?
ETA: Eliezer said of the original problem, "If you can't do the merge without killing people, then the trilemma is dissolved." Under a criterion of physical continuity, you cannot go from two objects to one object without at least one of them ceasing to be. So the original problem also appears to be a non-problem for me.
Are there any actual predictions that would be different with "continuity of substance" as the standard for identity rather than "similarity of composition"?
What does continuity of substance even mean with respect to Fock spaces or the path-integral formulation? All electrons (or protons, etc) are literally descended from all possible others.
These "subjective anticipations" are different, because I don't try to think of my copies as me.
Discussed here.