3 ms·

You're just playing a semantic game with the word "me" and "self". Saying they are both me and they are both not me is saying nothing, it's a meaningless state

You're just playing a semantic game with the word "me" and "self". Saying they are both me and they are both not me is saying nothing, it's a meaningless statement devoid if any value to communicate anything at all. Put the semantics aside, and try and address the actual underlying issue, identity. The second a clone exists, they are unique individuals, they cannot both be you anymore.

Smaug123 9y ago
Fine. But it's not really a surprise that the language becomes inadequate when the situation becomes extraordinary: the verb "to be" was never built to cover situations where a single entity bifurcates into two identical copies of itself, and you want to track the relationship between the children and the parent. > A copy of you is not you; one need only not destroy the original for you to quickly admit that the copy is not you. We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. > If I copy you, and ask you if the copy over there is you, you'll say no. Correct. This is using the word "is" in the same sense as I would if I said that I am no longer who I was five years ago. > If I then kill you, you have just been sentenced to death. To be precise, someone has just been sentenced to death who was once the Smaug123-who-is-typing-this-now. The one who was killed would say "I have been sentenced to death". The one who was not killed would say "someone else has been sentenced to death". > The copy will live on feeling as if it is you, but it isn't you, it's a copy of you. Now who's playing semantic games ;) this time, you're using the word "you" in a different sense to me. Again, "you" refers to two concepts here: the timeless "Smaug123 who is always the same person", and the individual "Smaug123 who can vary over time".
- gnaritas 9y ago
  > We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. That was not remotely a semantic game and I find this statement so absurdly intellectually dishonest that I'm done with this conversation.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

Smaug123 9y ago

Fine. But it's not really a surprise that the language becomes inadequate when the situation becomes extraordinary: the verb "to be" was never built to cover situations where a single entity bifurcates into two identical copies of itself, and you want to track the relationship between the children and the parent. > A copy of you is not you; one need only not destroy the original for you to quickly admit that the copy is not you. We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. > If I copy you, and ask you if the copy over there is you, you'll say no. Correct. This is using the word "is" in the same sense as I would if I said that I am no longer who I was five years ago. > If I then kill you, you have just been sentenced to death. To be precise, someone has just been sentenced to death who was once the Smaug123-who-is-typing-this-now. The one who was killed would say "I have been sentenced to death". The one who was not killed would say "someone else has been sentenced to death". > The copy will live on feeling as if it is you, but it isn't you, it's a copy of you. Now who's playing semantic games ;) this time, you're using the word "you" in a different sense to me. Again, "you" refers to two concepts here: the timeless "Smaug123 who is always the same person", and the individual "Smaug123 who can vary over time".

gnaritas 9y ago
> We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. That was not remotely a semantic game and I find this statement so absurdly intellectually dishonest that I'm done with this conversation.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]