3 ms·

What do you mean, "who we are", in your second sentence?

FreedomToCreate 11y ago
I mean i relation to our mind. If I took a hammer to your skull, I could fundamentally alter your personality. So the person you are right now is variable, depending on the state of your brain. So with that has a fundamental fact, who are you really but the state of your brain at the moment?
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  How do you measure a personality? What are its constraints? It appears to me that I am more than my brain. I have a body that I think I can control. If you define "you" as a sequence of states of matter, then the rest of your body should count too. >So the person you are right now is variable, depending on the state of your brain. So with that has a fundamental fact, who are you really but the state of your brain at the moment? This feels a bit circular to me.
- lliamander 11y ago
  A: "it seems the evidence of the prosecution overwhelmingly identifies you as the robber of the convenience store. What evidence do you provide in your defense?" B: " 'I' am nothing other than my present brain state. Since the entity that robbed the convenience store possessed a different brain state, we cannot be the same person." Not sure how that would fly. Maybe there is a meaningful concept of personhood that transcends specific brain states?
  - ux-app 11y ago
    >Not sure how that would fly I think it's generally accepted that, barring mental illness, we're accountable for our previous brain states.
    - jsprogrammer 11y ago
      Accountable to who? This sounds like mind police. Who can examine your actual brain states anyway?
      - ux-app 11y ago
        My comment was in reply to a scenario involving a crime. In this case you would be accountable to society/law enforcement. Unless you live in a cave, we're all accountable to many others, employers, loved ones etc, and, finally even to ourselves. After all haven't we all felt embarrassed or ashamed of something we did in a 'prior brain state'. > Who can examine your actual brain states anyway? Much can be inferred from actions. > This sounds like mind police A hyperbolic term. Aren't we all in a sense policing each other's minds? Part of living in a functional society involves creating and reinforcing social norms so that we can live in a slightly less chaotic world.
        jsprogrammer 11y ago
        Actions are different from brain state (as I can gather its definition in this thread). Are their brain states that shouldn't be allowed?
        ux-app 11y ago
        > Actions are different from brain state I think it would be fair to say that actions are a result of brain state, but not all brain states result in actions. > Are their brain states that shouldn't be allowed? Seems you've gone for a more philosophical angle. Of course your secret heat of hearts is yours and yours alone. We don't yet have the technology to decipher your thoughts, and even if/when we do we probably(hopefully) won't police them. In a more practical sense, when policing your own thoughts there certainly are thought patterns and by extension brain states that you should avoid because they have negative side-effects. Some examples are OCD, depression etc. For these there are medications and therapies designed to help correct aberrant brain states.
    - lliamander 11y ago

I mean i relation to our mind. If I took a hammer to your skull, I could fundamentally alter your personality. So the person you are right now is variable, depending on the state of your brain. So with that has a fundamental fact, who are you really but the state of your brain at the moment?

jsprogrammer 11y ago
How do you measure a personality? What are its constraints? It appears to me that I am more than my brain. I have a body that I think I can control. If you define "you" as a sequence of states of matter, then the rest of your body should count too. >So the person you are right now is variable, depending on the state of your brain. So with that has a fundamental fact, who are you really but the state of your brain at the moment? This feels a bit circular to me.
lliamander 11y ago
A: "it seems the evidence of the prosecution overwhelmingly identifies you as the robber of the convenience store. What evidence do you provide in your defense?" B: " 'I' am nothing other than my present brain state. Since the entity that robbed the convenience store possessed a different brain state, we cannot be the same person." Not sure how that would fly. Maybe there is a meaningful concept of personhood that transcends specific brain states?
- ux-app 11y ago
  >Not sure how that would fly I think it's generally accepted that, barring mental illness, we're accountable for our previous brain states.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    Accountable to who? This sounds like mind police. Who can examine your actual brain states anyway?
    - ux-app 11y ago
      My comment was in reply to a scenario involving a crime. In this case you would be accountable to society/law enforcement. Unless you live in a cave, we're all accountable to many others, employers, loved ones etc, and, finally even to ourselves. After all haven't we all felt embarrassed or ashamed of something we did in a 'prior brain state'. > Who can examine your actual brain states anyway? Much can be inferred from actions. > This sounds like mind police A hyperbolic term. Aren't we all in a sense policing each other's minds? Part of living in a functional society involves creating and reinforcing social norms so that we can live in a slightly less chaotic world.
      - jsprogrammer 11y ago
        Actions are different from brain state (as I can gather its definition in this thread). Are their brain states that shouldn't be allowed?
        ux-app 11y ago
        > Actions are different from brain state I think it would be fair to say that actions are a result of brain state, but not all brain states result in actions. > Are their brain states that shouldn't be allowed? Seems you've gone for a more philosophical angle. Of course your secret heat of hearts is yours and yours alone. We don't yet have the technology to decipher your thoughts, and even if/when we do we probably(hopefully) won't police them. In a more practical sense, when policing your own thoughts there certainly are thought patterns and by extension brain states that you should avoid because they have negative side-effects. Some examples are OCD, depression etc. For these there are medications and therapies designed to help correct aberrant brain states.
  - lliamander 11y ago