On Tue, 21 Feb 1995, Joseph J. Strout wrote:
>> > No, it would NOT be you. It would be a machine programed to simulate
> > you. You would be dead and a poor "copy" of you would be used to animate
> > a machine. You are nontransferable. You cannot be conscious in your
> > body one moment, imprint a copy of your personality, etc, on an inanimate
> > matrix, and then, viola, be conscious as YOURSELF in a machine. You ARE
> > inseperable from your biochemistry and evolution...
> "By assertion, we see that this is so..." =)
> Seriously, though, if you're going to make such strong (and potentially
> very important) assertions, please provide some arguments to back them
> up. Good hard data would be ideal, but if none is available either way,
> then careful logical constructions from explicit assumptions would be
> almost as helpful. What you claim is not at all obvious to me.
Hello. It is nice to hear the occassional reasonable voice amongst the
silly. The silly are easily irritated and baiting them can be amusing. I
have been dismayed, though I suppose in retrospect that it is unavoidable,
by the incredible simple-mindedness that exists here. In all truth, it is
no different than the nature of discussion and argument you find in
alt.alien.visitors with the UFO-conspiracy nutcases. I have quickly come
to see that, in general, this whole newsgroup would be better placed in
alt.future.fantasy or alt.sci-fi. Except for a few people who actually
KNOW what they are talking about, or are at least reasonably well
acquainted with specific biological molecules, aka, melatonin, retinoic
acids, HGH, etc, many others here seem to be gas station attendants, sales
clerks, or computer programer-types who have very little to say about
biology nor things biochemical. Such would be better served to discuss
Star Trek tech and episodes rather than real
biochemical/sociopolitical/cultural information.
That said, I will think on a nice response to your question and spend a
little free time digging around. There are those who need only an
off-the-cuff reply (because they don't care to examine information if it
doesn't fit their preconceived notions and emotional investments - such
individuals ONLY register an opposing view and attack it as though it
were a personal affront) and those who deserve more considered and in-depth
rejoinders.
Patrick, the neonazi ecologist from hell ;)
