Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Transhuman Space

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-27-2012, 12:23 PM   #921
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff_wilson View Post
You pointed to an observation of velocity as a way to distinguish one object from another. Velocity has to be measured relative to something else, so it cannot be an objective property of the original object.
That's one of the basic fallacies of twentieth century philosophy. "Relative" is not equivalent to "subjective."

The velocity of an object depends on the reference frame of the observer. But for each observer, there is one and only one objectively correct velocity. Moreover, from the velocity that you observe, it is possible in principle to compute the velocity that will be observed by anyone else in any other reference frame. That would not be remotely conceivable if velocity were subjective. And finally, from relative measurements, it is possible to determine measurements that are true in any reference frame, or invariants, such as rest mass, which are not relative.

This distinction even shows up in Newtonian physics. The mass of an object is absolute, and is an intrinsic property of the object; but its weight is relative to a given gravitational field. But that doesn't mean that you are free to suppose that an elephant weighs two ounces, or that a feather weighs a ton, if it pleases you. In fact, any given object has one objectively correct weight in a given gravitational field, and from that weight, you can predict its weight in any other gravitational field.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:26 PM   #922
Zell
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lund, Sweden
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pomphis View Post
No. But "put your money where your mouth is". If you claim certain beliefs in reality, why shouldn´t I ask you to behave according to what you claim to believe ?
I have already given you my position on this, but both you and whswhs seem content to not respond to what I actually write but instead repeat the same "arguments" over and over and not acknowledge the existence of the answers I give. I have tried to make sure that I respond to all the posts that are directed at me, but apparently hoping to receive the same courtesy is a bit too much.
Zell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:31 PM   #923
Zell
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lund, Sweden
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Also, could someone please explain to me what all this talk of electrons and whatnot have to do with the actual question we are supposed to be discussing? How does the logic work here, exactly?
Zell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:46 PM   #924
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zell View Post
I have already given you my position on this, but both you and whswhs seem content to not respond to what I actually write but instead repeat the same "arguments" over and over and not acknowledge the existence of the answers I give. I have tried to make sure that I respond to all the posts that are directed at me, but apparently hoping to receive the same courtesy is a bit too much.
I've been ignoring you for a while, because (a) you appealed to fundamental physics to argue that "identity" is meaningless, (b) I gave you an argument about the epistemic standing of theoretical physics, and (c) you gave no response to that argument. And then you fell silent. If you feel like addressing my arguments, I restated the essential point to Jeff Wilson recently:

That it's "the same book" does not need to be shown in terms of subatomic physics. We have a well understood concept of "the same book" at the macroscopic level of objects directly accessible to human senses; it's "the same book" if it appears the same, or has changes that can be causally accounted for, and if we can trace a history for it going back to when we last identified it. Such tracing of histories is done regularly in fields ranging from paleography to police custody of evidence. And our functioning in the macroscopic world, including our use of the concept of "the same," is the source of all our knowledge of everything, including our knowledge of subatomic physics. Subatomic physics may set boundary conditions for the applicability of macroscopic concepts of identity, but it cannot invalidate them without invalidating its own evidential support, and thus itself.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:46 PM   #925
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zell View Post
Also, could someone please explain to me what all this talk of electrons and whatnot have to do with the actual question we are supposed to be discussing? How does the logic work here, exactly?
As I recall, you were the one who brought subatomic particles into the discussion.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:58 PM   #926
Zell
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lund, Sweden
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
I've been ignoring you for a while, because (a) you appealed to fundamental physics to argue that "identity" is meaningless, (b) I gave you an argument about the epistemic standing of theoretical physics, and (c) you gave no response to that argument. And then you fell silent.
What posts have I not responded to? I have, as far as I know, responded to every single post you have addressed at me, while you have responded to fewer and fewer of my posts. Now, show what I didn't respond to and when I "fell silent".
Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
If you feel like addressing my arguments, I restated the essential point to Jeff Wilson recently:

That it's "the same book" does not need to be shown in terms of subatomic physics. We have a well understood concept of "the same book" at the macroscopic level of objects directly accessible to human senses; it's "the same book" if it appears the same, or has changes that can be causally accounted for, and if we can trace a history for it going back to when we last identified it. Such tracing of histories is done regularly in fields ranging from paleography to police custody of evidence. And our functioning in the macroscopic world, including our use of the concept of "the same," is the source of all our knowledge of everything, including our knowledge of subatomic physics. Subatomic physics may set boundary conditions for the applicability of macroscopic concepts of identity, but it cannot invalidate them without invalidating its own evidential support, and thus itself.
First of all, I have already responded to your whole "physics is irrelevant"-thing, but somehow you fell silent. Physics represents our most correct understanding of how the world works. However, I do agree with you when you say that subatomic physics has little to do with the current discussion - and I have wanted to steer the conversation away from that topic for some time now. If you had actually responded to my posts that much would have been evident. That you somehow seem to want to keep the conversation focused on something largely irrelevant says more about your side of the discussion, and the strength of your arguments, than my side.
Zell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:12 PM   #927
Zell
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lund, Sweden
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
As I recall, you were the one who brought subatomic particles into the discussion.
Well, I still want to know how the logic works. How does your argument look? Can you phrase it in a comprehensive way? I am actually not entirely sure what your position is, other than "ghosting is bad because identity". Your arguments all seem rather opportunistic and ad hoc.

My argument is rather simple: "Identity" as it's used in the context where a person and its uploaded ghost is said to have different identities is a meaningless folk psychological concept, just like "soul" or "qualia". Either "identity" is the sum of the mental characteristics we consider important to who we are or it has no comprehensive meaning whatsoever. All arguments against this belief is based on folk psychology or gut feelings.

That seems simple enough, doesn't it?
Zell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:27 PM   #928
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zell View Post
First of all, I have already responded to your whole "physics is irrelevant"-thing, but somehow you fell silent. Physics represents our most correct understanding of how the world works.
That's not a meaningful answer. How do you know that physics is correct? What is your evidential base? Are you simply adhering to it out of religious faith, or is your belief based on logic and evidence?

If the latter is the case, then the validity of physics rests on the validity of the evidence; and any assumptions that are made in the process of obtaining that evidence must still be made in physical theory. If physics invalidated them, it would invalidate itself. And continuity of numerical identity over time is one of the assumptions that is habitually made in every physics laboratory on earth. Similarity cannot substitute for it.

You want an example? Here is a physicist using an instrument to measure some property of some microsystem. How do they ensure that their measurements are meaningful? They calibrate the instrument before they use it; they do a series of measurements; and they calibrate it again at the end. And they rely on the instrument's readings to be consistent in between, because it's the same instrument. But "the same" cannot be determined by similarity, because the crucial similarity is similarity in scaling of the response. To show observationally that it had this similarity, they would have to recalibrate it during their actual measurements—but that would interfere with the measurement process. Instead, they infer that the response is similar from the fact that it is numerically the same instrument—and they don't worry about the possibility that a differently calibrated instrument of the same make and model might have teleported into their laboratory while they weren't looking. If they took that seriously, then all the theories of fundamental physics would be without evidential foundation and would have no claim to represent anything but a beautiful fantasy.

So, yes, subatomic physics cannot invalidate the concept of numerical identity on a macroscopic scale, and we can stop talking about it.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:32 PM   #929
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zell View Post
My argument is rather simple: "Identity" as it's used in the context where a person and its uploaded ghost is said to have different identities is a meaningless folk psychological concept, just like "soul" or "qualia". Either "identity" is the sum of the mental characteristics we consider important to who we are or it has no comprehensive meaning whatsoever. All arguments against this belief is based on folk psychology or gut feelings.

That seems simple enough, doesn't it?
And wrong. I am not a disembodied mental entity, and indeed, there are no disembodied mental entities. I am a physical entity, and my identity is the sum of my physical characteristics. If you create a computer model of some of those physical characteristics, that model as such is not an actual entity but a simulated entity, and it is running on a physical entity very different from me. Its identity and mine cannot be the same.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:44 PM   #930
Zell
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lund, Sweden
Default Re: Ghosts and Mind Copies - The Identity Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
That's not a meaningful answer. How do you know that physics is correct? What is your evidential base? Are you simply adhering to it out of religious faith, or is your belief based on logic and evidence?

If the latter is the case, then the validity of physics rests on the validity of the evidence; and any assumptions that are made in the process of obtaining that evidence must still be made in physical theory. If physics invalidated them, it would invalidate itself. And continuity of numerical identity over time is one of the assumptions that is habitually made in every physics laboratory on earth. Similarity cannot substitute for it.
The scientists also "assume" that the door to the lab is solid, even though they know most of it is actually empty space. They don't try to walk though it, they use the door handle. Does that mean that the idea that most of "solid" matter is empty space is false?
Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
You want an example? Here is a physicist using an instrument to measure some property of some microsystem. How do they ensure that their measurements are meaningful? They calibrate the instrument before they use it; they do a series of measurements; and they calibrate it again at the end. And they rely on the instrument's readings to be consistent in between, because it's the same instrument. But "the same" cannot be determined by similarity, because the crucial similarity is similarity in scaling of the response. To show observationally that it had this similarity, they would have to recalibrate it during their actual measurements—but that would interfere with the measurement process. Instead, they infer that the response is similar from the fact that it is numerically the same instrument—and they don't worry about the possibility that a differently calibrated instrument of the same make and model might have teleported into their laboratory while they weren't looking. If they took that seriously, then all the theories of fundamental physics would be without evidential foundation and would have no claim to represent anything but a beautiful fantasy.

So, yes, subatomic physics cannot invalidate the concept of numerical identity on a macroscopic scale, and we can stop talking about it.
Wow, this looks really similar to something I have already responded to. I wonder why. Now, I once remember saying something like "They aren't relying on its space-time history, they are relying on their state-based momentary memories of its past runs, which is strongly correlated (in their model of the universe) with systematic accuracy." I also fail to remember someone actually responding to that. That's odd. Surely you would never decline to respond to my answers and then restate the same "argument" while you have still to answer my counter-argument? Because that would be strange, especially since that you claim that 'I' stopped responding to your posts.
Zell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
verhängnisthread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.