|
Professor SJW posted:i would like to give 7 of 9 my hard scifi https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjBrqS6hitk
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:34 |
|
|
whether or not every transporter incident technically kills you doesnt really matter if you dont believe in a soul or afterlife the new you isnt just some knockoff genetic clone. it has the exact biochemical pattern that you define as your consciousness. its you. it just seems like its not you when youre still keeping an open mind to their being an afterlife
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
there was that one episode where Barclay was awake and observant while being beamed, and you gotta wonder what was left of him to be observant while being transported.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:whether or not every transporter incident technically kills you doesnt really matter if you dont believe in a soul or afterlife if that's true then explain Riker's duplication
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:she's not into taking random dudes dicks, much to obamas fortune Gross what the gently caress are you talking about we're discussing sci fi not dicks I want to give 7 of 9 my unpublished manuscript
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:if that's true then explain Riker's duplication Fake riker pulled off a dope jack move on ds9 then gave up because of feelings. That was so lame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:whether or not every transporter incident technically kills you doesnt really matter if you dont believe in a soul or afterlife From other people's perspective it is identical to you, from your perspective it makes no difference whether a copy is made or they just recycle your molecules into strawberry pocky
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:if that's true then explain Riker's duplication
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
TheSpamalope posted:Fake riker pulled off a dope jack move on ds9 then gave up because of feelings. That was so lame. Didn't even try and gently caress Kira before he gave up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
they eject all their trash before they jump to light speed
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Psycho Society posted:From other people's perspective it is identical to you, from your perspective it makes no difference whether a copy is made or they just recycle your molecules into strawberry pocky if the process is instantaneous or otherwise not experienced then there is functionally no death. one moment your consciousness is here the next instant it is over there. if youre still hanging on to the idea that its different than that then youre still hanging on to the idea of a soul
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:1 riker + 1 riker = 2 rikers. its not existentialisms fault that society doesnt have a means to account for a circumstance of 2 people having the same past. big deal which one is the "real" one?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:which one is the "real" one?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
its like the duped item bug in diablo see latest transporter patch notes
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
numberoneposter posted:its like the duped item bug in diablo
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
I think your argument of "the only reason you can believe in a consciousness that doesn't transfer is because you believe in the soul" is spurious. I posit that we simply don't know enough about how that all works to definitely state "it's fine don't worry about it, it's actually you coming out the other end." I don't need to believe in the existence of a soul to question how consciousness is transferred as well. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
its simple we are meat robots and self awareness is an evolved survival trait run awry
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
we know everything about the hypothetical. youre just trying to hold onto a physical concept and a metaphysical concept at the same time when they dont work together. i recommend you disregard all metaphysical and see how plain and simple the physical scenario is it really isnt the least bit complex how consciousness is transferred? consciousness in a given instant is defined physically as a electrical and chemical pattern. please dont substitute the word "consciousness" for the word "soul" as you are really using/understanding it gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:consciousness in a given instant is defined physically as a biochemical pattern. Please provide proof for your assertion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Please provide proof for your assertion. Dude it's an emergent property so it comes from all of the brain goo nobody can point to it!!! *adds bubble solution to pipe*
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Please provide proof for your assertion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:youre assuming you experience death Except it's not your consciousness, it's a copy of it. You won't experience anything after transporting. A clone with all your memories isn't you, it's just indistinguishable from you from an outside perspective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:if you want me to prove consciousness isnt really your ghost floating around in the ether just above your head then thats really your problem to deal with No I want you to show me the biochemical basis for "consciousness" instead of acting like a smuggo about it. If your entire argument is "as long as this biochemical process is transferred, then it is actually 'you'" then you must be able to show me evidence that a simple biochemical process is all there is to a consciousness and additionally that transferring it will retain that exact same consciousness. Since the answers to that are currently beyond human scientific knowledge (afaik) I assume you either know something I don't or are just huffing your own metaphysics ideology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Psycho Society posted:Except it's not your consciousness, it's a copy of it. You won't experience anything after transporting. A clone with all your memories isn't you, it's just indistinguishable from you from an outside perspective. We went over this earlier in the thread. If your worried about this, then you need to be worried that the you from 5 or so years ago who had a completely different atomic structure is dead now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Universe Master posted:We went over this earlier in the thread. If your worried about this, then you need to be worried that the you from 5 or so years ago who had a completely different atomic structure is dead now. That's not similar at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Yeah that's a pretty drat false equivalency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:because Star Trek is "safe" sci-fi that is afraid to explore the actual implications of their technology. it may as well be a fantasy novel. it's p much Harry potter with dilithium crystals and set heading 131 mark 14 mark 10e instead of normal magic words
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Psycho Society posted:Except it's not your consciousness, it's a copy of it. You won't experience anything after transporting. A clone with all your memories isn't you, it's just indistinguishable from you from an outside perspective. "you won't experience"? consider the transportation as instantaneous. there is no experience of death. the precise definition of what your consciousness is was in one location and the next instant it is in another. the sum total of not only all your parts but also the essence of what defines "you" without the romantic notion of a soul, there is no longer any romantic notion of "you". if there is not an aspect of you that can not be truly duplicated (soul), then it follows that "you" in every aspect can be duplicated. your copy is you. not just "like" you, "is" you
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Yeah again you're just ignoring the bit about "prove that's how consciousness works." I also think you're assuming a lot about the functioning of this hypothetical transporter. quote:the precise definition of what your consciousness is was in one location and the next instant it is in another. I'll say that if in the future we figure out how to precisely define it then sure I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
now if there is a soul then at the moment of transportation you get to experience the afterlife i guess and there is a soulless copy of you going through the motions. an abomination. and if you werent deconstructed then obviously youre the one with soul and you get to go to heaven later if youre good if you arent sure that consciousness is not a function of the physical brain then youre not willing to rule out metaphysical nonsense. enjoy your healing crystals gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:we know everything about the hypothetical. youre just trying to hold onto a physical concept and a metaphysical concept at the same time when they dont work together. i recommend you disregard all metaphysical and see how plain and simple the physical scenario is I think you are probably right but the questions people are raising are valid. If we imagine someone being duplicated down to their last atom without the original being destroyed then we see why people are doubtful. You wouldn't argue that the original would continue to perceive the experiences of the copy as if they were happening to the original. This is what people are talking about, the subjective perception of their own continued existence. Not souls. I think you're probably right that persistent consciousness is a kind of illusion but I don't see how you can claim such certainty about this. Particularly as your fatuous description of the phenomenon of consciousness as "a electrical and chemical pattern" suggests that you are no expert on neurobiology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
There is a big a big problem with Multiplicity
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
some of you guys really need to come to an understanding that everything you are experiencing is literally stuff physically happening in your brain. an extremely complex pattern of matter and energy and the entire premise of the transporter is that it can read that entire pattern all in one go and exactly reproduce it elsewhere if your brain stops working, your experiences stop and youre dead. *croak*. another hard reality is that the universe wont end for everyone when you die. everything else will just keep carrying on
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:if you arent sure that consciousness is not a function of the physical brain then youre not willing to rule out metaphysical nonsense. enjoy your healing crystals You're kind of starting to be irritating with insisting that you are the true arbiter of scientific knowledge and we're all dumb for not realizing self evident truths when all I am asking is a question that has baffled actual real scientists for years. Osric posted:Particularly as your fatuous description of the phenomenon of consciousness as "a electrical and chemical pattern" suggests that you are no expert on neurobiology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
do me a favor and outright suggest that maybe there is something beyond the physical that makes up our consciousness. simply insinuating it in the "just asking questions" way is so disappointing it is a simple thing to answer. do you really think consciousness is metaphysical? yes or no (circle one) fun fact: if you can't let go of your metaphysical notions, you are literally considering things outside the definition of what is science. thats the matter here. not what is known scientific information but what is outright not science by definition gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:do me a favor and outright suggest that maybe there is something beyond the physical that makes up our consciousness. simply insinuating it in the "just asking questions" way is so disappointing Why do you think that just because I'm asking you how the biochemical process of consciousness works in terms of what happens when it is just transferred as you suggest that I'm saying "there must be a soul or something outside the physical?" It's getting to the point that I think you're just trolling because you're not even attempting to understand the arguments made against you in favor of just repeating the same thing over and over again. quote:it is a simple thing to answer. do you really think consciousness is metaphysical? yes or no (circle one) Of course it isn't. That doesn't mean there aren't still issues with transportation as presented by Star Trek.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Why do you think that just because I'm asking you how the biochemical process of consciousness works in terms of what happens when it is just transferred as you suggest that I'm saying "there must be a soul or something outside the physical?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Changing the subject, Voyager sure must have been equipped with more than the standard two shuttlecraft since they seem to destroy one every other episode. Unless they have a giant replicator that's just constantly farting them out. Alo they took the Delta Flyer = car analogy way, way too loving far. A drag race in space? That don't make a lick of sense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:That doesn't mean there aren't still issues with transportation as presented by Star Trek. and if you are intent on viewing this through the specifics of canon star trek transporter specifications, i recommend you play video games instead gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:34 |
|
|
Well, at least it's better than Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:49
|
|
