= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Dolores1984 comments on Female Test Subject - Convince Me To Get Cryo - 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 (176)
Trying to live forever is associated with evil (religious cached thought):
I'm not religious, but was raised Christian. Annoying as this is, I still find religious cached thoughts sometimes. I don't want to keep them - I'm sharing for the sake of documenting all the thoughts that are being triggered while I make my decision. Thinking about signing up for cryo triggered this:
My cached thought is associating living forever with being tempted by the devil, and seeing it as a thing that only sinful people would do.
I realize that I would not be guaranteed everlasting life. Even if I was revived, I expect it would be for a much shorter time than "forever". That wouldn't change the fact that I'm mortal or circumvent the threat of hell. I'm not sure where the sense of defiance comes from. I suppose it would defy the current way of things but expecting life forms to just shut up and die is silly.
I don't see why extending your life would have to qualify as sinful. It just makes sense.
Living forever isn't quite impossible. If we ever develop acausal computing, or a way to beat the first law of thermodynamics (AND the universe turns out to be spatially infinite), then it's possible that a sufficiently powerful mind could construct a mathematical system containing representations of all our minds that it could formally prove would keep us existent and value-fulfilled forever, and then just... run it.
Not very likely, though. In the mean time, more life is definitely better than less.
Let me ask you this. Somebody makes a copy of your mind. They turn it on. Do you see what it sees? Someone touches the new instance of you. Do you feel it?
When you die, do you inhabit it? Or are you dead?
Depends on your definition of 'you.' Mine are pretty broad. The way I see it, my only causal link to myself of yesterday is that I remember being him. I can't prove we're made of the same matter. Under quantum mechanics, that isn't even a coherent concept. So, if I believe that I didn't die in the night, then I must accept that that's a form of survival.
Uploaded copies of you are still 'you' in the sense that the you of tomorrow is you. I can talk about myself tomorrow, and believe that he's me (and his existence guarantees my survival), even though if he were teleported back in time to now, we would not share a single thread of conscious experience. I can also consider different possibilities tomorrow. I could go to class, or I could go to the store. Both of those hypothetical people are still me, but they are not quite exactly each other.
So, to make a long story short, yes: if an adequately detailed model is made of my brain, then I consider that to be survival. I don't want bad things to happen to future me's.