Both are dead, since the clone are just like you and you are dead it means that the clone are dead as well.
holy shit its not just me that have thought about stuff like this!
It's dead. the teleported one is just new smart flesh and has its own life
[QUOTE=acidcj;33872586]How is copying and destroying any different from moving?[/QUOTE]
Thank you, this totally made me rethink my stance on this.
Previously I thought in the same way as paul simon, who summed it up pretty well.
I think the reason why we think this way, is because we really do not know what ties my consciousness to my brain. We know a bit about why I feel this and that, due to this and that chemical, but even if we fully understood how my brain worked, it still seems to me that we cannot explain why [I]I[/I] am feeling [I]my[/I] brain, and not someone else's.
It is indeed as if something outside of the brain ties identity to my brain, so that my brain is me, and not some other brain.
And thus, the idea of teleportation with "copying and destroying" seemed scary and fascinating, because it would seem to destroy the consciousness that is tied to my brain, and merely create another one for the other.
But indeed, there should be no difference between "copying and destroying" and moving the particles. The conditions from the start was that the result would be [I]exactly the same.[/I]
So, while I previously believed that teleportation would make your consciousness cease to exist and produce an "imposter", I now find it more likely that your consciousness will carry over.
The thing is, whatever it is that makes [I]you[/I] take place in [I]your brain[/I], -must- be something to do with how the particles are arranged in your brain. And because of that, it makes no difference if you move the particles or if you destroy them and rebuild it from scratch. As long as the resulting person is [I]exactly the same[/I], it will be the same consciousness. [I](Unless of course there actually is something outside that ties identity to the brain, then you'd be fucked.)[/I]
But then we can start to talk about what consciousness is, and whether we're all really just psychological zombies and what not... Well fuck.
[editline]31st December 2011[/editline]
Additional thought, if moving particles has the same effect as destroying them and rebuilding them, then we can easily conclude that your consciousness will carry over, because we move our particles all the time..
And wait, don't we also lose particles and pick up new ones too, all the time?
Yeah, I would consider you dead.
I never got this logic. If you say "Muwaharharhar, I'm going to be immortal!" and make clones of yourself, it's not going to make you live any longer. You are gonna die, and some people who bear an uncanny resemblance to you are going to live on for a little longer. They might be a clone, but they are not YOU.
There's always the bend time and space teleport method, just step over to the other side.
you would be dead, not your clone. The clone is alive
I love scrolling through this thread and seeing all the one-line half-baked responses littering the actually well thought-out statements.
I really like where Sherow was going with this idea. If our consciousness is caused by an exact mixture or structure of chemicals and stuffs in our brain, would it be such a stretch to theorize that, if that structure was created somewhere else, our consciousness would exist there?
Maybe our consciousness is the result of a physical manifestation or specific ingredients, like cheesecake. Cheesecake is a mixture of elements that, when put together in the exactly correct way, create cheesecake. There are a few variations that can be made to make [I]different[/I] cheesecake, but cheesecake only exists when a specific structure of ingredients exists in the right order. Perhaps, our consciousness follows this model, in that it exists when the right bits and pieces come together in a specific way. Nevertheless, controlling atoms has never been possible or predictable, due to our understanding of the way atoms act and react, so, even if the above was true, I still doubt that transportation will ever be possible unless we can accurately and precisely assemble atoms without disrupting other atoms.
It depends on if you believe in a soul. If it was atom for atom, electron for electron, quark for quark exactly the same, then it's pretty simple. If you believe in a soul, you're dead, if not, then you're still alive.
[QUOTE=The one that is;33960137]Considering this exact clone would be JUST like you, have the same DNA patterns and the same thoughts and memories, yes it would be you. EXACTLY you, it's the exact same being with NOTHING different, thus is the same being. People are different because of different cell DNA and such, if it's all the same, you're the same.[/QUOTE]
It would be exactly you, but you'd still be dead.
A dies, is replaced by B which is exactly 100% identical to A in every physical aspect.
A is still dead, even though no-one can tell the difference, because B has taken its place.
[editline]1st January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=MrWhite;33989389]I love scrolling through this thread and seeing all the one-line half-baked responses littering the actually well thought-out statements.
I really like where Sherow was going with this idea. If our consciousness is caused by an exact mixture or structure of chemicals and stuffs in our brain, would it be such a stretch to theorize that, if that structure was created somewhere else, our consciousness would exist there?
[/QUOTE]
Mmno, it wouldn't. Our consciousness is the electrical impulses in our brain, having fun between our neurons and shit. Having a physically identical brain appear by happenstance somewhere else wouldn't be ME, it's be an instance of me.
Yes, [b]you[/b] would be dead.
Most people here agree that if an exact "copy" or clone of a person died, the person would be dead. Now, what about teleportation? If every particle in a human is copied, deleted and "pasted" another place. Is this 1. A clone of the "original" person (the original persone is dead), or 2. the same person?
If 1. is correct, then it could be impossible to prove. Say, we have Stephen Hawking being teleported in this way. He would disappear from one location and pop out in space somewhere else. Now, this clone would have exactly the same memory as the original Stephen. But Stephen would not be there, bu the new Stephen would [i]think[/i] that he is the same as the original. Or?
2. I think that if you were copying someones atoms and destroying them, the the original person would be dead. However, teleportion can be to move something really fast through space. This however, will not kill the person, as there will be no copy of that person.
Okay I'm going to make my real input now. I think there's a hell of a lot of misconceptions floating around in this thread. The thought experiment is an entity being destroyed (entity A) and a functionally identical one (entity B) (i.e. the same conscious continuum) being created simultaneously. And the question is, are you still alive/in existence? This depends entirely on your account of personal identity; a philosophical inquiry distinct from regular identity.
In order to determine your account of personal identity you have to decide which are the [B]essential properties[/B] for you being you. In order words, what properties can you change before [B]you[/B] stop existing? [I]All[/I] you need to do to solve the problem is determine what personal identity is.
If you're a certain sort of functionalist (imo one of the best theories of the mind), there doesn't seem to be much reason to argue that B is any different from A, as it's functionally identical. However functionalism poses at least a couple of strange conclusions, one of them being far more problematic.
1) According to functionalism, mental states - that is, the actual mental events going on [I]right now[/I] - are identical to the function of the brain. This means a computer carrying out the same function as your brain thinks, as well as a hugely complex system of flag-waving. Imagine millions and millions of people holding flags, each acting as binary information in much the same way a computer does. If it carries out the same function as your brain, the very collection of flag-wavers themselves are a thinking entity. Personally I have absolutely no problem with this conclusion, and I in fact totally agree with it.
2) If we change the thought experiment to one where entity A is destroyed, but TWO functionally identical entites are created (B1 and B2), according to functionalism, B1 is personally identical to B2, but not identical to it (because they are not numerically identical, and strict identity is a relationship an entity can only hold to itself). While this is technically not contradictory, it seems silly to me to suggest that something can be personally identical with something that isn't itself.
(2) suggests that persons persisting over time doesn't work on a functionalist account which presumably lots of people will find uncomfortable.
So we have a dilemma here. We can either rethink the essential properties of personal identity and test those, or accept the fact that personal identity cannot persist over time.
I'm in the latter camp. I believe all I am is my current bundle of perceptions and any belief in my persistence over time is an illusion.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;33997421]It would be exactly you, but you'd still be dead.
A dies, is replaced by B which is exactly 100% identical to A in every physical aspect.
A is still dead, even though no-one can tell the difference, because B has taken its place.
[editline]1st January 2012[/editline]
Mmno, it wouldn't. Our consciousness is the electrical impulses in our brain, having fun between our neurons and shit. Having a physically identical brain appear by happenstance somewhere else wouldn't be ME, it's be an instance of me.[/QUOTE]
Your response makes no sense relative to what I wrote.
Yes, you would be dead.
Though the clone would have the still conscious like you he would then probably still make the descisions you would have made for everything. Unless he found out he was a clone of course.
When you die, it doesn't mean your consciousness would just transfer to the clone. You would cease to exist and an exact replica experiencing different things would take your place.
I also doubt seeing yourself die wouldn't be distressing.
Unless you can feel your transaction to another body, like jump clones in EVE. In short your Mind jump from one clone to another one. Or when your clone dies your consciousness jumps to a emergency clone.
Rendering you immortal.
This is quite interesting.
If you and you clone were exactly identical. And I mean down to the atom level. Exactly the same impulses in the brain, you both occupy exactly the same position in space (yes not physically possible but imagine). You are identical.
The clone is you. And you are the clone.
You are both aware of the same things and neither of you knows of the others existence. If one dies, then it'd be logical to assume that the other one continues his life as usual, just as you would do if the clone dies.
The clone is a copy, even if it is physically identical to you, and even if we don't believe in an immaterial soul or consciousness. Two identical atoms are still two different atoms, and the same would apply to our consciousness.
It helps understand if you think of consciousness not as a physical object, but as a [I]process.[/I]
The brain and everything in it adds up to your memories, personality, everything. No one who knows you could tell the difference between a physically identical copy of you. But that copy would still be a different creature from you, and you would not experience life "as if you were two people" or anything like that.
Think of it like computers. The physical computer, processor, hard drive, etc are the brain. The software that is stored on the hard drives are like the memories and personality.
But when the computer is on, the software is "loaded" and is a running process. This is unique. Even if another computer down the street is identical, running the exact same program, it's still two different processes that have no knowledge or link to each other.
When you cut the power from your computer, that process is stopped, it dies. You can restart the program, and it will seem identical, but it's actually a new process.
This is, anyway, the common materialistic view. Nobody really knows what the consciousness is, but the above explanation is what most people who have studied this seem to find the most logical.
If you believe in a soul or that consciousness is somehow "outside reality", or whatever, well then there's no answer cause we don't know nothing about that.
There's a lot of good literature out there talking about these things. Sadly though, it's more philosophy and logic than hard, proven science, and even more sadly I don't think we will understand this stuff anytime soon. Here's a fun one to start with:
[url]http://www.newbanner.com/SecHumSCM/WhereAmI.html[/url]
Then jump to the wikipedia page on consciousness, p-zombies, etc, and go slowly insane as you try to think about this.
Edit: here's nice link too:
[url]http://whatblag.com/2011/05/04/on-continuity-of-consciousness-problems-of-body-mind-and-soul/[/url]
I am for myself pretty much of a dead-guy but those for those who are around me i will be still alive.
i am not a man of great speeches.
yes you would be dead, as a clone of you, although the same, their experiences after they have been cloned are not the same as yours therefore they have learned and seen different things in a different way, to everyone else they wouldn't notice and any changes in personality would be gradual due to experiences but if you didn't die the changes and differences would become apparent, especially after a couple of years.
Although I am in no way religious or spiritual, as I am athiest, but surely to a religious person this answer should be simple anyway, if souls exists, how could you simply copy one? surely they'd be a different person? so the original person is gone in every aspect, even though their "appearances" live on
I'm never going to attempt teleporting if it ever happens in my lifetime, because if at the other end its just a copy but your original consciousness was dead.. then nobody would even know. Causing everyone to use it to die, with nobody even realising.
No, since I don't believe in souls. Since my body is still running around exactly the same as the previous me, I am not dead.
yes because its not you.
[QUOTE=BlazeFresh;36564781]I'm never going to attempt teleporting if it ever happens in my lifetime, because if at the other end its just a copy but your original consciousness was dead.. then nobody would even know. Causing everyone to use it to die, with nobody even realising.[/QUOTE]
So funny to know I'm not the only one who thinks exactly like this. It actually takes me back to an old Star Trek TNG episode where there's this character who's never used a transporter, because he's terrified of the idea of being torn down at the molecular level. The whole episode is basically the entire crew telling him to stop being a little bitch about it...very interesting episode.
[QUOTE=Stormcharger;36617493]yes because its not you.[/QUOTE]But the clone is an exact copy of you in every way, how would that not be you?
[QUOTE=dije;36620207]But the clone is an exact copy of you in every way, how would that not be you?[/QUOTE]
Because it's still a clone and not the original. Regardless of how exact a copy is it is not the original simple as.
Lets say you have two identical computers. Similar hardware and everything. If you smash the original one, it's dead. It has nothing to do with the copied one.
I think the same applies to us.
A clone is not the same as the original person, it is a different body and a different mind. A clone is only geneticly the same, things like your mind are not the same, so if you were the smartest man alive, and you had a clone made, the clone would not neccercerally be smart. The clone is not you, a clone is only a genetic copy, and your mind is not part of your genes, so long answer short, if you die but your clone is still alive, you are dead.
[QUOTE=tytrains;36634738]A clone is not the same as the original person, it is a different body and a different mind. A clone is only geneticly the same, things like your mind are not the same, so if you were the smartest man alive, and you had a clone made, the clone would not neccercerally be smart. The clone is not you, a clone is only a genetic copy, and your mind is not part of your genes, so long answer short, if you die but your clone is still alive, you are dead.[/QUOTE]
Well to be honest the idea of this debate is that if the clone had all your memories and personality, and then you are killed, are you still alive
Yes, because even twins aren't the same person despite being genetically identical. Reason being is experiences and lifestyle choices make you more you than your genetics.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
