• Gerowen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 hours ago

    But that means the original, “real” you died and the person that comes out the other side is essentially a clone with a copy of your memories.

    • kadu@scribe.disroot.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Is that distinguishable from the “real” you, though? Because from a material point of view, that’s real life too.

      Your cells are dying and renovating, the atoms that make up your body come and go, your consciousness is a sliver of a moment of a flow of electricity that is gone before you can even intercept a moment.

      If you could track every little bit of matter that makes you, you wouldn’t be able to keep an unique well defined “you” at any point in time. A convoluted system maintains your memories and self thorough that experience.

      • I’d argue that an instance of life is it’s continued existence. An interruption where it gets fully destroyed means that instance of a life has ended. Once reconstructed, a perfect, indistinguishable copy is created, but it is not the same life.

        If you were to create the copy without destroying the original, would you now be in two places at the same time? Or are there two you’s in two different points in space?

        • ryannathans@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          What about when you sleep, or get anesthesia? Continued existence of what exactly?

          What if you kill and freeze a person, and revive them later?

          What if you do the same but piece by piece and reassemble them?