Prev: water detected on moon before chandrayan went kaput - plentyof it
Next: Australia Dust Storm ... WELL DESERVED DIVINE RETRIBUTION FOR WELL KNOWN COLLECTIVE CRIMES
From: Osmium on 25 Sep 2009 14:55
It is possible for there to be another person whose emotions and
reactions are very close, and in fact nearly identical, to yours.

A person does not have to have a twin to meet individuals who react in
an almost identical manner to him or her. The way all cultures
respond in the same manner to even subtle variations in music
indicates that the inner mental life of most people is quiet similar.
Therefore there will be people whose mental reactions match those of
others to an almost exact degree.

However as with twins these people are also not "doppelgangers."

In my opinion the sole reason they are not is that they do not have
the same memories. If my twin could be programmed now to have
identical memories as myself then he would be my doppelganger and if
he died it would not really be like him dying---the two people, in
this hypothetical case would not be two separate conscious beings
(unless you believe in a soul).
From: alien8er on 26 Sep 2009 03:37
On Sep 25, 11:55 am, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> It is possible for there to be another person whose emotions and
> reactions are very close, and in fact nearly identical, to yours.

What else to expect from extremely similar wetware?

Hell, I've met cats with more, to say nothing of equal, depth of
emotional experience compared to that of some humans.

> A person does not have to have a twin to meet individuals who react in
> an almost identical manner to him or her.  The way all cultures
> respond in the same manner to even subtle variations in music
> indicates that the inner mental life of most people is quiet similar.
> Therefore there will be people whose mental reactions match those of
> others to an almost exact degree.

Fine so far.

> However as with twins these people are also not "doppelgangers."

Please, sci.physics is not the place to go all metaphysical.

Yeah, I read your reply to Unc, but if you're gonna troll, you
better expect some semi-serious replies.

> In my opinion the sole reason they are not is that they do not have
> the same memories.

Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
originals?

> If my twin could be programmed now to have
> identical memories as myself then he would be my doppelganger and if
> he died it would not really be like him dying---the two people, in
> this hypothetical case would not be two separate conscious beings

Unsupported logic leap.

> (unless you believe in a soul).

Beliefs are irrelevant. Got evidence?


Mark L. Fergerson
From: Osmium on 26 Sep 2009 16:54
On Sep 26, 12:37�am, alien8er <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 11:55�am, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > It is possible for there to be another person whose emotions and
> > reactions are very close, and in fact nearly identical, to yours.
>
> � What else to expect from extremely similar wetware?
>
> � Hell, I've met cats with more, to say nothing of equal, depth of
> emotional experience compared to that of some humans.
>
> > A person does not have to have a twin to meet individuals who react in
> > an almost identical manner to him or her. �The way all cultures
> > respond in the same manner to even subtle variations in music
> > indicates that the inner mental life of most people is quiet similar.
> > Therefore there will be people whose mental reactions match those of
> > others to an almost exact degree.
>
> � Fine so far.
>
> > However as with twins these people are also not "doppelgangers."
>
> � Please, sci.physics is not the place to go all metaphysical.
>
> � Yeah, I read your reply to Unc, but if you're gonna troll, you
> better expect some semi-serious replies.
>
> > In my opinion the sole reason they are not is that they do not have
> > the same memories.
>
> � Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
> originals?
>
> > �If my twin could be programmed now to have
> > identical memories as myself then he would be my doppelganger and if
> > he died it would not really be like him dying---the two people, in
> > this hypothetical case would not be two separate conscious beings
>
> � Unsupported logic leap.
>
> > (unless you believe in a soul).
>
> � Beliefs are irrelevant. Got evidence?
>
> � Mark L. Fergerson


"Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
> originals?"

I don't think they ("double-goers") will necessarily have the same
memories as the originals. But what I am saying is that "if" they did
then there would be no real difference between the original and the
"doppelganger"----meaning that there is no unique soul or
consciousness or separate being.

Think of your own inner mental life. You react intellectually and
emotionally to stimulus. Your short term and long term memory is
involved in this. Now think of what the unique "you" than you
percieve really is. Right, it is only those present reactions and
memories.

The upshot of this being that when you dies some unique being has not
disappeared forever. Given an infinite universe somewhere a world
like this will be replicated to the smallest degree and you will live
again.

One more thing. My "trolls" are not exactly "trolls"---or if they are
they are intellectual trolls. Further I try, while making them
provocative, to make them interesting and founded on some informed
speculation. I do not simply say, "People who love animals are sick"
to get a reaction.

Unc's responses are more like low IQ trolls----"stooooopid.." If I
speculate that the origin of the universe is a runaway quantum
fluctuation then Uncle says I am stoooopid because Unc knows the real
origin.
From: alien8er on 27 Sep 2009 04:23
On Sep 26, 1:54 pm, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 26, 12:37 am, alien8er <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 25, 11:55 am, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > It is possible for there to be another person whose emotions and
> > > reactions are very close, and in fact nearly identical, to yours.
>
> > What else to expect from extremely similar wetware?
>
> > Hell, I've met cats with more, to say nothing of equal, depth of
> > emotional experience compared to that of some humans.
>
> > > A person does not have to have a twin to meet individuals who react in
> > > an almost identical manner to him or her. The way all cultures
> > > respond in the same manner to even subtle variations in music
> > > indicates that the inner mental life of most people is quiet similar.
> > > Therefore there will be people whose mental reactions match those of
> > > others to an almost exact degree.
>
> > Fine so far.
>
> > > However as with twins these people are also not "doppelgangers."
>
> > Please, sci.physics is not the place to go all metaphysical.
>
> > Yeah, I read your reply to Unc, but if you're gonna troll, you
> > better expect some semi-serious replies.
>
> > > In my opinion the sole reason they are not is that they do not have
> > > the same memories.
>
> > Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
> > originals?
>
> > > If my twin could be programmed now to have
> > > identical memories as myself then he would be my doppelganger and if
> > > he died it would not really be like him dying---the two people, in
> > > this hypothetical case would not be two separate conscious beings
>
> > Unsupported logic leap.
>
> > > (unless you believe in a soul).
>
> > Beliefs are irrelevant. Got evidence?
>
> >"Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
>
> > originals?"
>
> I don't think they ("double-goers") will necessarily have the same
> memories as the originals.  But what I am saying is that "if" they did
> then there would be no real difference between the original and the
> "doppelganger"----meaning that there is no unique soul or
> consciousness or separate being.

There is a flaw in your ointment...

> Think of your own inner mental life.  You react intellectually and
> emotionally to stimulus.  Your short term and long term memory is
> involved in this.  Now think of what the unique "you" than you
> percieve really is.  Right, it is only those present reactions and
> memories.

I'm not going to bother arguing with you about the origins of
creativity. Just yet.

> The upshot of this being that when you dies some unique being has not
> disappeared forever.  Given an infinite universe somewhere a world
> like this will be replicated to the smallest degree and you will live
> again.

Nope. The defining characteristic that distinguishes "me" from
"everyone else" is the continuity of _my_ memory. Same goes for
everyone else.

The Universe may be infinite but it is probably not open, hence
assuming a duplicate of me will exist/has existed is not only
unlikely, it is irrelevant; there is no continuity of memories to
connect that other putative consciousness with mine.

I am indeed unique. Again, same goes for everyone else.

> One more thing.  My "trolls" are not exactly "trolls"---or if they are
> they are intellectual trolls.  Further I try, while making them
> provocative, to make them interesting and founded on some informed
> speculation.  I do not simply say, "People who love animals are sick"
> to get a reaction.

Well, in most states they're lawbreakers.

> Unc's responses are more like low IQ trolls----"stooooopid.."  If I
> speculate that the origin of the universe is a runaway quantum
> fluctuation then Uncle says I am stoooopid because Unc knows the real
> origin.

Unc knows which theories have evidence to support them, but has no
patience with those who don't bother to research a subject before
propounding on it.


Mark L. Fergerson
From: Osmium on 28 Sep 2009 00:29
On Sep 27, 1:23�am, alien8er <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 26, 1:54�pm, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 26, 12:37 am, alien8er <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 25, 11:55 am, Osmium <Rusht...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > It is possible for there to be another person whose emotions and
> > > > reactions are very close, and in fact nearly identical, to yours.
>
> > > What else to expect from extremely similar wetware?
>
> > > Hell, I've met cats with more, to say nothing of equal, depth of
> > > emotional experience compared to that of some humans.
>
> > > > A person does not have to have a twin to meet individuals who react in
> > > > an almost identical manner to him or her. The way all cultures
> > > > respond in the same manner to even subtle variations in music
> > > > indicates that the inner mental life of most people is quiet similar.
> > > > Therefore there will be people whose mental reactions match those of
> > > > others to an almost exact degree.
>
> > > Fine so far.
>
> > > > However as with twins these people are also not "doppelgangers."
>
> > > Please, sci.physics is not the place to go all metaphysical.
>
> > > Yeah, I read your reply to Unc, but if you're gonna troll, you
> > > better expect some semi-serious replies.
>
> > > > In my opinion the sole reason they are not is that they do not have
> > > > the same memories.
>
> > > Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
> > > originals?
>
> > > > If my twin could be programmed now to have
> > > > identical memories as myself then he would be my doppelganger and if
> > > > he died it would not really be like him dying---the two people, in
> > > > this hypothetical case would not be two separate conscious beings
>
> > > Unsupported logic leap.
>
> > > > (unless you believe in a soul).
>
> > > Beliefs are irrelevant. Got evidence?
>
> > >"Why do you think double-goers will have the same memories as their
>
> > > originals?"
>
> > I don't think they ("double-goers") will necessarily have the same
> > memories as the originals. �But what I am saying is that "if" they did
> > then there would be no real difference between the original and the
> > "doppelganger"----meaning that there is no unique soul or
> > consciousness or separate being.
>
> � There is a flaw in your ointment...
>
> > Think of your own inner mental life. �You react intellectually and
> > emotionally to stimulus. �Your short term and long term memory is
> > involved in this. �Now think of what the unique "you" than you
> > percieve really is. �Right, it is only those present reactions and
> > memories.
>
> � I'm not going to bother arguing with you about the origins of
> creativity. Just yet.
>
> > The upshot of this being that when you dies some unique being has not
> > disappeared forever. �Given an infinite universe somewhere a world
> > like this will be replicated to the smallest degree and you will live
> > again.
>
> � Nope. The defining characteristic that distinguishes "me" from
> "everyone else" is the continuity of _my_ memory. Same goes for
> everyone else.
>
> � The Universe may be infinite but it is probably not open, hence
> assuming a duplicate of me will exist/has existed is not only
> unlikely, it is irrelevant; there is no continuity of memories to
> connect that other putative consciousness with mine.
>
> � I am indeed unique. Again, same goes for everyone else.
>
> > One more thing. �My "trolls" are not exactly "trolls"---or if they are
> > they are intellectual trolls. �Further I try, while making them
> > provocative, to make them interesting and founded on some informed
> > speculation. �I do not simply say, "People who love animals are sick"
> > to get a reaction.
>
> � Well, in most states they're lawbreakers.
>
> > Unc's responses are more like low IQ trolls----"stooooopid.." �If I
> > speculate that the origin of the universe is a runaway quantum
> > fluctuation then Uncle says I am stoooopid because Unc knows the real
> > origin.
>
> � Unc knows which theories have evidence to support them, but has no
> patience with those who don't bother to research a subject before
> propounding on it.
>
> � Mark L. Fergerson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

"Unc knows which theories have evidence to support them, but has no
patience with those who don't bother to research a subject before
propounding on it."

This is exactly what is wrong with Uncle Al's posts. First there are
no Uncle Al posts with original and provocative ideas. Secondly when
someone does come up with a fascinating speculation (not talking about
myself) Uncle Al shoots it down with a brief adolescent insult and
then cites some standard science such as, "There are no exceptions to
the Second Law of Thermodynamics".

Not only is he a killjoy, or a discussion killer, but he demonstrates
the failure to think "outside the box" (sorry for the trite phrase--
couldn't think of any other) that prevented the theory of relativity
from being discovered earlier, and which would have prevented the
invention of the laser, or the integrated circuit.


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: water detected on moon before chandrayan went kaput - plentyof it
Next: Australia Dust Storm ... WELL DESERVED DIVINE RETRIBUTION FOR WELL KNOWN COLLECTIVE CRIMES