= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
michaelhoney comments on Welcome to Less Wrong! - 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 (1953)
I think you're on the right track. There'll be a lot of personal-identity assumptions re-evaluated over the next generation as we see more interpenetration of personal parts as we start to offload cognitive capacity to shared resources on the internet.
Semi-related: I did my philosophy masters sub-thesis [15 years ago, not all opinions expressed therein are ones I would necessarily agree with now] on personal identity and the many-world interpretation of quantum physics. Summary: personal identity is spread/shared along all indistinguishable multiversal branches: indeterminacy is a feature of not knowing which branch you're on. Personal identity across possible worlds may be non-commutative: A=B, B=C, but A≠C.
Technically, that's non-transitive - non-commutative would be A=B but B≠A.
(Also, it is mildly confusing to use an equality symbol to indicate a relationship which is not a mathematical equality relationship - i.e. reflexive, commutative, and transitive.)
(Also, a Sorites-paradox argument would suggest that identity is a matter of degree.)
I think I understand (and agree with) the other parts, but how is this possible?