What Inspired The Play?

[Daravon]

One of the problems it seems is that people think that the human body is something unique and special. As more and more information is discovered, we're really just a large, complex computer.

Some can accept slowly replacing parts of their body to repair broken peices (contacts, artificial limbs (more and more possible by the day), and eventually new brain matter), then why not an entire, instant replacement of all the parts?

If indeed humans are not all that special and we're just a mass of neurons that relay electrical impulses generated by a 'program' running in our brain, then there's no real reason why we couldn't eventually map out what causes us to act like we do.

If it really is that simple, then the easiest way to see how well the copy matches the original is to use the same sort of monitoring on the host body as we do the brain. Whatever outside input the body receives, feed it to the program and measure reactions. What will be interesting will be sectioning off parts to control our copied selves (such as the lung and eye controls in the play). The testing itself is tricky from an ethics standpoint because you're not just debugging a program, you're essentially experimenting on a 'human'.

End of rambling.

[TheVoice]

First of all, here's to hoping Harry steps back in at some point, as that would make this discussion much more lively.

I would like to conjecture that "consciousness" or a "soul" is merely a justification that the mind has come up with for the purposes of rationalization and self-preservation. I don't think it's fair to suppose that it exists, when there is no proof that it does. It seems to be on par with religion, in my view. We feel that something has to be true, so we make up something to explain it.

I will try to keep this short, but I will explain further. If you were living your life, then suddenly moved to Spain, you would turn out differently than if you had stayed in your hometown. For all intents and purposes, these are two versions of you. They are both, in fact, you.

Let's take this to a quantum level. Basic quantum mechanics state that particles do exist in multiple places at the same time. They are, in fact, the same particle. They are exactly the same, and they exist in multiple places at once. I repeat, they are one particle. I see no reason why clumping together a bunch of particles in a specific order so that they cooperate as one unit, such as a human, would suddenly cause a magical, mystical "soul" to appear. I have yet to see any reason why it would exist, or even what it is. Every argument that I have seen that presupposes the existence of a "soul" basically states "but I don't want to die". I proffer that if you exist simultaneously in two places, then shut one off, you never died.

If you were magically transported to being a digital version of yourself, or if a digital copy was made that was activated at the exact moment flesh you died, it would have the same result. You have moved. Perhaps somewhere more exotic than Spain, but you have moved all the same. Whether you slowly transfer data and kill off the flesh version just as slowly or if you make a copy and kill the original all at once is purely semantic, and makes no difference. You, in your entirely, including every little particle, string, and everything else you can possibly imagine, existed in one place, then existed in two, then existed in one. You have moved.

Occam's Razor merely states that the simplest answer is the correct one. This would imply that a mystical "soul" is unnecessarily clogging up the works. If you remove this variable, of which there is no proof that it exists, suddenly everything fits together.

[lefsef]

[TheVoice]

[FuriousBroccoli]

[Jaydude5]

[TheVoice]

[Judas Iscariot]

Let's get back to basics. While I can accept the notion that an identical clone can be created in theory the fundamental problem is the question of consciousness.

Let's look at the analogy of the traveller to Spain made by a previous poster. Sure the traveller has a different "consciousness" when he arrives in Spain and his "consciousness" of his old home is retained in his memory. I agree that the clone would have the same memories as the original it was copied from. But like the traveller, who only exists in one place at a time (ie he doesn't have a separate existence at home because he has moved to Spain) the suggestion is that the consciousness of the original is somehow tranferred to the clone at the moment of death. That's what "resurrection" is proposing or what some of the other posters including Harry himself are suggesting. Now if that was possible it would be equally possible to produce a clone while the subject was still alive or indeed as many as you liked who would all share the same senses and thoughts.

If that was at all possible then identical twins (who are biological clones) would see through each other's eyes and indeed experience all of each other's senses and thoughts. That they do not is a fact that cannot be disproved by quantum mechanics.

"Consciousness", in my opinion, is simply the product of the individual brain. The clone may well have an identical consciousness but it still isn't ME. I die but a replica of my consciousness lives on. To all outside observers it is ME at the point of activation. But I'm dead.

Happy New Year everybody!

Judas

[HarryStottle]

[Wikidme]

[HarryStottle]

[DekaR]

[HarryStottle]

[Onireves]

[HarryStottle]