you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

I had a similar argument with a friend, and I think he won that time. It came out of left field and rephrases the whole thought experiment.

Instead of me defending the argument, how would you interpret a clone incident? Would you get 'the other feed' as well? We have the sleep cycle where we don't actively get input (even though our conciousness is present during dreams to a certain extent). So if a transporter clone incident rebuilds the person on the other side, but an original instant could go on experiencing a life that wouldn't be if the transporter functioned correctly.

Hopefully that took the soul out of your argument!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    cloning is pretty simple: you end up in both places. there's no magical continuity of experience, both clones are equal and will 100% feel like the original and have equally valid claims to such, and to a third observer it would basically just look like two very confused identical twins who share their memories before the cloning.
    You obviously wouldn't end up with a single conscience experiencing both points of view at once, lmao.

    it's just like copying data on a computer, it's all the same data so it's nonsensical to call any copy the "original".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment