mooremj@EGLIN-VAX (10/10/85)
From: mooremj@EGLIN-VAX
When an amoeba divides into two new amoebas, each an exact copy of the
original, which is the "original"? There is no choice between them.
The same argument holds for the transmitter/copier; both results will believe
themselves to be the original. Don Provan and some others seem to be arguing
that there must be a continuity of consciousness from the original to one of
the results, making it the "original". But if the copy is perfect,
consciousness itself is duplicated, so there is a continuity from the original
to *both* results; perhaps it is better to think of it as twinning, like the
amoeba, than as copying.
A wild but intriguing possibility is that the results might have *one*
consciousness shared among their bodies. There was a great story called
"Let's Be Frank" (author forgotten) which dealt with a shared-consciousness
mutation in the human race. I highly recommend it; I'll try to research the
author's name (unless somebody posts it first.)
marty moore (mooremj@eglin-vax.arpa)polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry Polard) (10/23/85)
In article <3976@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> mooremj@EGLIN-VAX writes: >From: mooremj@EGLIN-VAX > >When an amoeba divides into two new amoebas, each an exact copy of the >original, which is the "original"? There is no choice between them. >The same argument holds for the transmitter/copier; both results will believe >themselves to be the original. A delighful short story about this is William Tenn's "Party of the Two Parts." -- Henry Polard (You bring the flames - I'll bring the marshmallows.) {ihnp4,cbosgd,amd}!fortune!polard N.B: The words in this posting do not necessarily express the opinions of me, my employer, or any AI project.