# What makes a person?



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

I have been reading a book called "The Pig That Wants To Be Eaten" by
Julian Baggini.
It is a book on thought experiments.

This particular one intrigued me.

"For James, the teletransporter is the only way to travel. Previously it took months to get from the earth to mars, confined to a cramped spacecraft with a far from perfect safety record.
James TeletransporterExspress changed all that. Now the trip takes minutes, and so far it has been 100% safe. However, now he is facing a lawsuit from a disgruntled customer who is claiming the company actually killed him. his argument is simple : the teletransporter works by scanning your brain and body cell by cell, destroying them, beaming the information to mars and reconstructing you there. Although the person on mars looks, feels and thinks just like a person who has been sent to sleep and zapped across space, the claimant argues that what actually happens is that you are murdered and replaced by a clone.

To James, this sounds absurd. After all, he has taken the teletransporter trip dozens of times, and he doesn't feel dead. Indeed, how can the claimant seriously believe that he has been killed by the process when he is clearly able to take the case to court?
Still, as James entered the teletransporter booth once again and prepared to press the button that would begin to dismantle him, he did, for a second, wonder whether he was about to commit suicide ???????

What makes a person?

3098


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Woah...that's some crazy stuff. If I even try to answer this, I'll get existential. lol


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

> the teletransporter works by scanning your brain and body cell by cell


Now, supposing that were possible, and instead of cloning you at the other end, they just took your memories/brain scans and placed them in a robot with your consent, would you still be you?
Is it just self awareness that's makes the person?

3098


----------



## ?real?ity? (Feb 18, 2007)

what makes a person? biology, environment, upbringing, experience



Pollyanna 3098 said:


> > the teletransporter works by scanning your brain and body cell by cell
> 
> 
> Now, supposing that were possible, and instead of cloning you at the other end, they just took your memories/brain scans and placed them in a robot with your consent, would you still be you?
> ...


either way, science has found we are a big community of cells. which are constantly dieing, and replacing itself. if you're still that "you" mentally, why should it mean any difference on the physical plane what happens. you don't change because of thoughts, the thoughts change the you. get what i'm saying?

self-awareness means being able to look at the ego (the essential "you"), and question oneself


----------



## PPPP (Nov 26, 2006)

:shock: woah.....

If the 2nd copy was the same as the first.. then it would be a person surely but I don't know if it would be the same person...

creepy thought. :|

And the whole issue of the soul comes into it too.. whether you believe in that makes a big difference to the question.


----------



## medo (Dec 19, 2006)

LOL. We never run out of scary thoughts do we. What if we have soul, then the clone is just another body and not you.


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

This really depends on whether the self is the soul (if such a thing exists) or just the coordinated firing of neurons. 
It wouldn't be possible to replicate a soul unless a soul were made of matter (atoms). But then again, what if the soul does exist and it is made of matter? Invisible matter. I mean, the air is invisible but it is still matter because it is made up of molecules, right? Crazy...I shouldn't analyze this...it could take me to a dark place. :shock: lol
This makes me think of an argument I once read about the existence of souls. The article was talking about how skeptics say it's impossible because people with alzheimer's and other disorders lose their sense of self. The people making the argument came back with something to this effect:
The body is like a television. The television (the brain) is not the source of the images (the soul), it is merely the conduit through which we view them. If your television is broken, you do not assume that the images do not exist. They still do, you are just unable to view them.
They said it better, but that's it in a nutshell. Made more sense in the article.


----------



## PPPP (Nov 26, 2006)

invisible.ink said:


> But then again, what if the soul does exist and it is made of matter? Invisible matter. I mean, the air is invisible but it is still matter because it is made up of molecules, right? Crazy...I shouldn't analyze this...it could take me to a dark place. :shock: lol


 :shock: I know...

Do you ever think about dark matter? .... your post just made me think of it. pushing things around but invisible and intangible. 
The universe is weird.


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Layla said:


> invisible.ink said:
> 
> 
> > But then again, what if the soul does exist and it is made of matter? Invisible matter. I mean, the air is invisible but it is still matter because it is made up of molecules, right? Crazy...I shouldn't analyze this...it could take me to a dark place. :shock: lol
> ...


That's part of what led me to my existential angst. I've always been a science buff and I'm particularly into astrophysics. I love to research stuff like that for fun. The beginning of the universe, the eventual heat death of the universe (entropy). Quarks, black holes...(I'm especially interested about how they believe time stops at the event horizon). Eventually, I got so deep into it that it scared the sh*t out of me. Science can take you to dangerous places mentally.
In fact, I actually came up with my own theory, that is based merely on speculation, nothing mathematical. They say the universe is infinite. But it is constantly expanding. But if you really think about it, the universe is NOT infinite. We just think it is because it is expanding faster than the speed of light and we would never be able to catch up. There must be an end to it but if we were to set out on a voyage to find the end, we would never be able to catch up to the end because according to the theory of relativity, it would be impossible for us to travel faster than the speed of light. Therefore, we'd always be a step behind and it would only SEEM infinite, but it really isn't. That's just my crackpot theory though. lol 
When the universe was a milisecond old, it would've been small enough to hold in your hand, therefore, it had an end. At 300,000 years old, it was about the size of our solar system, so, it had an end. Why should it be any different now? It is just too big for us to comprehend so we label it "infinite".


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

The answer I am searching for is, how am I able to leave my body and see myself?
I don't mean go off and fly around the cosmos, its just sometimes when I become extremely DP'd, I step out of myself, I can literally see myself from someone else's perspective. How is that possible?

3098


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Pollyanna 3098 said:


> The answer I am searching for is, how am I able to leave my body and see myself?
> I don't mean go off and fly around the cosmos, its just sometimes when I become extremely DP'd, I step out of myself, I can literally see myself from someone else's perspective. How is that possible?
> 
> 3098


I wonder if we sometimes literally experience out of body experiences. Science labels DP as a purely psychological or neurological experience. But what if our soul semi-seperated from our bodies as a defense mechanism in response to some form of trauma? :shock:


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

invisible,ink



> I actually came up with my own theory, that is based merely on speculation, nothing mathematical. They say the universe is infinite. But it is constantly expanding. But if you really think about it, the universe is NOT infinite. We just think it is because it is expanding faster than the speed of light and we would never be able to catch up. There must be an end to it


That would mean that at the end there would be nothing, well even nothing is something. :shock:

3098


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Pollyanna 3098 said:


> invisible,ink
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly! How can there be nothing? HOW? How, I say?? lol
I hate the fact that the human brain cannot comprehend this. But then again, if we could, it might be scary. Or even boring because then, what would we ruminate on? lol


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

You are right it, is beyond our level of understanding.
It would be like trying to explain physics to a baby.
Yet everything we are taught is based on our level of understanding, that's the scary part.

3098


----------



## monnolith (Feb 21, 2007)

In the original question, Billy-Bob-world-traveler claimed he was murdered and then cloned. This would be true if his memories and awareness were not transported to the new body, and he had no recollection of his former self. But then he wouldn't have sued for murder because he wouldn't have remembered being alive before the trip.

The soul/spirit/self-awareness is what defines a person. If it is that which is transferred into another vessel, then yes, it is the same person. If a robot (android, "artificial person", cyborg, et al) were to develop it or be infused with a person's ghost (G.I.T.S.), then it would still be a person - the definition of "person" would be different, but the person him/her/itself would still be a person. By different, I mean: not male, female, or hermaphrodite, but still able to express "individual will" and "self-awareness" and interact on a higher level of consciousness with others.

Billy-Bob-world-traveler apparently has DR and needs meds and/or a good therapist.


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

monnolith said:


> Billy-Bob-world-traveler apparently has DR and needs meds and/or a good therapist.


LOL :lol:


----------



## PPPP (Nov 26, 2006)

monnolith said:


> The soul/spirit/self-awareness is what defines a person. If it is that which is transferred into another vessel, then yes, it is the same person. If a robot (android, "artificial person", cyborg, et al) were to develop it or be infused with a person's ghost (G.I.T.S.), then it would still be a person - the definition of "person" would be different, but the person him/her/itself would still be a person. By different, I mean: not male, female, or hermaphrodite, but still able to express "individual will" and "self-awareness" and interact on a higher level of consciousness with others.


But that assumes that the souls and the body are seperable, almost independant of one another. a Cartesian 'ghost in the machine' but if we have souls would that be the case?
Hypothetically, what if the soul and the body are deeply linked? Or the soul is not something that can be copied?
Then the soul cannot be sent to a new body when the original body dies. The new body then has all the traits of the original but has a different soul. Then would they still be the same person?
It's a sticky question. :?


----------



## monnolith (Feb 21, 2007)

Layla: of course they are seperate - consider what happens when a person dies? Or, when a person is kept alive _after_ dying? Sure there are cases where a person "comes back" after dying, but doesn't that prove my point?

So, BBWT (Billy-Bob-world-traveler) _did_ die, _was_ cloned, but is deluded in thinking that he was somehow murdered. That's like saying that Dolly (the sheep) would be murdered if the original sheep were killed. That's circular logic - popular in religion, but inappropriate for this particular discussion.

Instead, he should be complaining about being _born_ as an adult, having missed his entire childhood up to the point in time in which he was spontaneously created; his memories a sham, and his past a vaguely familiar nugget of sureality. Oh well, at least he didn't have to worry about puberty.


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

> That's like saying that Dolly (the sheep) would be murdered if the original sheep were killed.


OK Layla, what about this, lets assume that Dolly 1 and Dolly 2 are not sheep, they are humans, but dolly 1 had assets. Dolly 2 is an exact clone of Dolly 1, who would the assets belong to?

Is Dolly 1 really the same as Dolly 2 ?

3098


----------



## PPPP (Nov 26, 2006)

Pollyanna 3098 said:


> > That's like saying that Dolly (the sheep) would be murdered if the original sheep were killed.
> 
> 
> OK Layla, what about this, lets assume that Dolly 1 and Dolly 2 are not sheep, they are humans, but dolly 1 had assets. Dolly 2 is an exact clone of Dolly 1, who would the assets belong to?
> ...


I guess dolly 2 would inherit as the closest relative 



monnolith said:


> Layla: of course they are seperate - consider what happens when a person dies? Or, when a person is kept alive after dying? Sure there are cases where a person "comes back" after dying, but doesn't that prove my point?


That's a point of view but you can't prove that scientifically, at least not yet. As far as I know you don't know, any more than the rest of us, what happens when we die. 
And the mind and the soul are not the same thing. I have had friends suffer brain damage but they're the same person even though their mind is not the same.

Like I said before, personal beliefs would make a major difference to how you resolve this question.

Anyway Monolith, I wasn't talking about my own personal beliefs but taking a stance for the sake of looking at all aspects of the argument. 
I'm catholic.
I personally would say that if we have souls then the first one died and the second one is a different person with a different soul. A soul is not something you can clone. You can't even measure it scientifically so how could you copy it?
And I would say definitavely that a copy is not the original, however exact it may be.
The clone isn't the one who died, they are alive and well but they are a different person. Dolly2 is not the same sheep as dolly1. Identical twins are not the same person, even if they had the same memories they would not be the same person.

If they made an exact copy of Bob1 without destroying Bob1 and Bob1 and Bob2 are standing side by side then would you say that they are the same person, just one personstanding there? No. They are obviously two individuals.


----------



## medo (Dec 19, 2006)

If the universe has no end then it is hard to understand, and if it does then what is the end and what the end looks like?

Luckily I believe in God and this doesnt bother me as it says in Quran "People have been given little knowledge"

There is also a good book by some Turkish scientist called "Matter-another name for illusion". He believes that we do not really exist the way we think we do. Its a good theory but I can't accept it because of my DP. Makes me more ill


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

As much as I enjoy this type of discussion, I am no closer to finding out why I can step out of myself and see myself from an other persons perspective.
I cannot do it at will, but when I am extremely DP'ed

Has anyone got any theories?

3098


----------



## ?real?ity? (Feb 18, 2007)

Pollyanna 3098 said:


> As much as I enjoy this type of discussion, I am no closer to finding out why I can step out of myself and see myself from an other persons perspective.
> I cannot do it at will, but when I am extremely DP'ed
> 
> Has anyone got any theories?
> ...


do you mean literally? how do you know what anothers prespective of you is


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

And medo,

you opened your post with


> If the universe has no end then it is hard to understand, and if it does then what is the end and what the end looks like?


I do believe the universe has no end, therefore it has no beginning either

3098


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

?real?ity?,

You asked me


> do you mean literally? how do you know what another's prespective of you is


Yes literally, I can see myself, I know what I look like and I can feel the things that I am doing, they just feel all out of place.

Also when I am in bed I can see myself laying in bed.
That is different I know, I am probably just dreaming that, but the other,
that can happen anytime 

3098


----------



## ?real?ity? (Feb 18, 2007)

Pollyanna 3098 said:


> ?real?ity?,
> 
> You asked me
> 
> ...


i'm still confused... do you mean you feel like you have a alteration or splitting of the psyche in which you look foreign to yourself. or literally out of body experience


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

It is an out of body experience, it is like I am seeing a clone of myself.
That's what made me start this thread. During the out of body experience who is the real me, and how is it possible?

3098


----------



## Ludovico (Feb 9, 2007)

A human being trying to understand the infinity of the universe is like a penguin trying to write a book on nuclear physics, we're just not there yet


----------



## Pollyanna 3098 (Dec 12, 2006)

> A human being trying to understand the infinity of the universe is like a penguin trying to write a book on nuclear physics, we're just not there yet


So why do we partake in this futile Rumination, what do we get out of it do you think?

3098


----------



## Homeskooled (Aug 10, 2004)

I just wanted to state, that, for the record, clones of humans DO exist. They exist right now, and they have identical DNA and even personality traits. They are called identical twins. If the nucleus of a fertilized egg spltis itself in the first seven days, natural cloning has occurred, or as normal people say, "We're having twins!"

It may seem odd to other people out there, but I dealt with this same thought experiment, that of a person stepping into a transporter, and whether it was moral or immoral, last year. Myself, a priest, and a theology student from Notre Dame argued it. The preist, I believe, reference Plato and Thomas Aquinas, I referenced myself, Descartes, Aquinas, and Pope John Paul II. My personal opinion? The union of body and soul, according to the Catholic Church (so take this as you will), is called _hylomorphis_. Based on the Greek. But there is a much more ancient understanding of the soul which I ascribe to, that "soul" is simply the "life of God in the body". That the soul is the entire package - the breath of God _in_ our cells. So that the entire package, material and spiritual, is You, is the "soul".

Now, onto the thought experiment: A good way to dissect it, and the way I dissected it in our argument, is to ask "How does the transporter work, and what if it malfunctioned?" If the transporter works by tearing my cells apart, then blasting the same cells to Mars through some sort of conduit, I can buy that I have been killed and resucitated there, just like a person who has been legally dead and then resucitated. But thats not how this thought experiment is usually phrased. No - in this thought experiment, you are dissected, and NEW cells are used to reconstruct you on Mars. In other words, it is like a fax machine. So my question is, how much is it like a fax machine? In a fax machine, since the "copy" is made from entirely new materials elsewhere, the original document still exists when your done faxing. We dont call the fax the "orginal". If the machine malfunctioned, and my cells here were NOT destroyed, but only scanned, would there be another "me" a clone of myself AND my thoughts, walking around on Mars? Yes, I bet there would. And like an identical twin, it would have my DNA, my personality traits, but like a twin, it would be an entirely new and different person with its own soul and free will to live as it chose. He would not be me. And so I side with the plaintiff, that he is a clone, his donor was murdered, and that the donor's wife deserves compensation.

As for the ever-expanding universe theory, it is false to assume that the Universe is infinite. It is still finite. And although it is constantly expanding, scientists cant seem to decide whether it is accelerating or decellerating as of late. Einstein, however, proved that the reason that you cant travel to the "end" of space, is that it curves in on itself, like the inside of a globe. He proved that if you were to set out from earth and reach the "edge" of space, and continue traveling, you would eventually find out that you had been flipped around and would finally arrive right back at earth, where you started. I dont want to expound on this stuff too much, because I dont want people here to start flipping out!

Peace
Homeskooled

PS- Pollyanna, this perceptual shift can occur because of multiple things, but suffice it to say, that it is only perceptual. Your body is still alive when your "perception" shifts. You are in no way two people, or even truly outside of your body, or is your "soul" or life, leaving your mortal coil. If it was, you would see people resucitating it as you watched. The temporal and parietal lobes are implicated in DP, and they are the centers of our self-perception and "body map", which allows you to know your right side from your left. Along with neurologic reasons, I for my part believe there are spiritual reasons for this too, and that they both stem from dysfunction.


----------



## ?real?ity? (Feb 18, 2007)

i don't think you should worry about people flipping out. if people are gonna be flipipng out they shouldn't even be on the internet. that shits crazy enough ! but generally, i think alot of things in science are a guess, not really a fact, everything seems to take a little faith, more or less. how can we as humans even go there. there as in the idea of infinite and what space is. it seems that his idea of a the morphing space or whatever you want to call it, is a jab at a logical answer of what space is.

oh by the way, civilization 2 pwns, i used to be able to find download it of anbandonia.com but not anymore


----------



## flat (Jun 18, 2006)

If the universe is constantly expanding, then what is it expanding into? What if the universe suddenly hit a brick wall and couldn't expand anymore?

I always thought that teleporters scanned your cells, then dismantled your body cell by cell (would that hurt?) and teleported these same cells via a teleporter beam to another location and then put all these cells back together again to form your body. Yes you may have died in the process but it's still the same you. So unless your soul came along for the ride and re-entered your body when it was put back together again then this is proof that cells put together in just the right way creates life and consciousness. I rest my case. However if this teleporter only transmitted data of this person's body and reconstructed a new body from new cells then wouldn't there be a pile of dead original cells that someone has to clean up? Ew.

Pollyanna, just from what perspective do you see yourself when you are outside your body? Are you looking down from the ceiling and seeing yourself sitting on a chair? Or are you looking to your right or left and seeing yourself beside you? Or are you in front of your body looking directly at your face? It's hard to picture how you see yourself and from what angle or direction. Nonetheless, it's probably a stress induced illusion like a dream.

Hmmm, when twins are formed does the soul also split itself (like the nucleus does) and go into both embryos? Or does the soul only enter the the embryo (or embryos) after it has matured beyond that point? If a baby dies at birth or an embryo is aborted does the soul still have a consciousness and know how to communicate when it goes back to heaven? I wonder if it thinks to itself stuff like "damn I was almost born!" or "too bad my body was sick". If it does, then where did it learn english?


----------



## PAXIS (Aug 12, 2006)

Yeh you would be dead, the orginal cells containing the information would no longer exist so it's just a clone on the other side. How obsurd!


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Homeskooled- 
Originally, astrophysicists believed that the universe was decelerating and that eventually it would contract resulting in the "Big Crunch" theory. Then, there would be another "Big Bang" and the process would begin anew. Recent evidence, however, suggests the opposite. The universe is indeed accelerating at an unbelievable rate. This is proven by the fact that each year, other galaxies are moving farther and farther away from us. Therefore, the "Big Crunch" theory is almost out the window. There is not enough matter in the universe to generate enough gravity to stop the universe from expanding. So, eventually the expansion will rip every molecule in the universe apart, including those that make up our Earth. Eventually, the universe will have expanded so far that matter will no longer exist (according to the law of conservation of matter it will become pure energy and even that may be ripped apart) causing it to become a cold, dark, empty void that will continue to expand at an even faster rate because then the gravitational pull on itself will be 0.


----------



## ?real?ity? (Feb 18, 2007)

WERE ALL GOING TO DIE! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!! *takes a deep breath* AHWHAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *jumps out window and lands on hotdog stand below*


----------



## Homeskooled (Aug 10, 2004)

Yes, your correct Invisible Ink, that is the newest theory. But the idea of dark matter is already throwing a wrench into this, because according to current theories, we should already have flown apart. There just isnt enough visible matter to hold us together. But now we have dark matter. Trust me - this newest acceleration theory will only last a year or two, and then there will be another completely contradictory finding, that will muck up your existential angst and give you hope. My point is that physics is basically at the same point we were when Christopher Columbus sailed for the Indies by traveling West, and everyone thought he would die. According to their best data, he was a goner. Of course, they left an entire continent out of their data, which does tend to have some impact on the outcome, and so this part of the Western Hemisphere was discovered. So you never know exactly where your hope will come from next, or how little we really know. The universe is much better taken care of and put together than we little pessimistic humans give it credit for. It'll be alright.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## invisible.ink (Feb 2, 2007)

Homeskooled said:


> Yes, your correct Invisible Ink, that is the newest theory. But the idea of dark matter is already throwing a wrench into this, because according to current theories, we should already have flown apart. There just isnt enough visible matter to hold us together. But now we have dark matter. Trust me - this newest acceleration theory will only last a year or two, and then there will be another completely contradictory finding, that will muck up your existential angst and give you hope. My point is that physics is basically at the same point we were when Christopher Columbus sailed for the Indies by traveling West, and everyone thought he would die. According to their best data, he was a goner. Of course, they left an entire continent out of their data, which does tend to have some impact on the outcome, and so this part of the Western Hemisphere was discovered. So you never know exactly where your hope will come from next, or how little we really know. The universe is much better taken care of and put together than we little pessimistic humans give it credit for. It'll be alright.
> 
> Peace
> Homeskooled


I agree with this. In fact, I believe that humans will never uncover the secrets of the universe because our brains are not advanced enough to even comprehend such information. It almost makes me sad that we may never know. Of course, it may be better that way because I'm sure that if we uncovered whatever secrets the universe might hold humanity would go insane.


----------

