3 ms·

I think it's more accurate to say the problem is "me." We don't need to worry about it most of the time, but the only "me" around is the state of your brain at

I think it's more accurate to say the problem is "me." We don't need to worry about it most of the time, but the only "me" around is the state of your brain at this instance in space and time. Anything else is just more or less "me"-like, but not exactly "me." So if someone recreated you in triplicate, the instant after they appeared, all four of you would all be the same amount "you," though you four would all diverge thereafter, and be more and more some other version of you.

Smaug123 9y ago
Nice angle I hadn't really crystallised in my mind. I'll meet in the middle and say that the problem is the combination of "is" and "me"; one sense of "is" applies to a particular sense of "me", and the other sense of "is" applies to the other sense of "me".
- treebeard901 9y ago
  Now if one of the copies mysteriously grows a goatee then all bets are off.
gnaritas 9y ago
Simply put, identity and equality are different things; he's conflating them. This was already pointed out, but he didn't grok it.
- Smaug123 9y ago
  I'm not conflating identity and equality; I'm arguing that you mean two different things by "identity" but are using one word to refer to both, resulting in confusion all round.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    I was not replying to you, you're intellectually dishonest, we're done, I've made that clear.
- charlesism 9y ago
  I think it's all relative. Identity and equality are the same if you disregard a thing's environment. Are two USB keys with the same data on them "the same"? It depends on what you care about.
dhimes 9y ago
Indeed, this is the essence of the Buddhist denial of "self." The idea of a persistent self is a convenient abstraction for communicating things like "I'll go to the store this afternoon," but it should not be mistaken for the reality that the persistent self doesn't exist. "You" die every moment.

Smaug123 9y ago

Nice angle I hadn't really crystallised in my mind. I'll meet in the middle and say that the problem is the combination of "is" and "me"; one sense of "is" applies to a particular sense of "me", and the other sense of "is" applies to the other sense of "me".

treebeard901 9y ago
Now if one of the copies mysteriously grows a goatee then all bets are off.

gnaritas 9y ago

Simply put, identity and equality are different things; he's conflating them. This was already pointed out, but he didn't grok it.

Smaug123 9y ago
I'm not conflating identity and equality; I'm arguing that you mean two different things by "identity" but are using one word to refer to both, resulting in confusion all round.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  I was not replying to you, you're intellectually dishonest, we're done, I've made that clear.
charlesism 9y ago
I think it's all relative. Identity and equality are the same if you disregard a thing's environment. Are two USB keys with the same data on them "the same"? It depends on what you care about.

dhimes 9y ago

Indeed, this is the essence of the Buddhist denial of "self." The idea of a persistent self is a convenient abstraction for communicating things like "I'll go to the store this afternoon," but it should not be mistaken for the reality that the persistent self doesn't exist. "You" die every moment.