Help me I'm so confused about consciousness and I want to

>>8598863
>"if a clone of you appeared in the room right next to you and then was killed, would you know the difference"?
(You) would be dead and your clone would go on masquerading as you, and no one would know. Fucking clones.

>>8598868
no im saying if the clone was killed

>>8598863
The likely answer is that, if you have two frozen copies of your brain, and you unfreeze then both, both will be "you", and you have made a copy of a person. This defies your intuition because we did not grow up in a world where this sort of thing happened, but it's probably how it would work nonetheless. (Remember, sometimes intuitions are just flat wrong, especially in situations where you violate a rule that held throughout all evolutionary history.)

>That is to say, if you had to pick one before you were frozen and that one would be thrown in the garbage, which one would you choose before the other is reanimated?
Either. It doesn't matter at all.

So basically you believe that the star trek teleporter scenario actually teleports you and there's no problem with entering one? I actually believe that, too, but another problem I have is that if you have two clones existing at the same time and they were each shown a different number, how could you be aware of both without communicating? This might actually boil down to the same problem as: why am I over here and you're over there? It seems a question of the objective identity of my and your consciousness. "How" is mine different from yours, even if we were clones? Clearly they're different to an external observer and I believe they are even different as themselves. They aren't aware of each other's experiences. It fucks with my head x.x

>>8598944
>So basically you believe that the star trek teleporter scenario actually teleports you and there's no problem with entering one?
Yes.

>how could you be aware of both without communicating?
The confusion here lies in the word "you". There are two different people, that start out as being very similar and slowly grow less so as they have different experiences. Person 1, who calls himself Anon, sees the number 42. Person 2, who calls himself Anon, sees the number 37. There is no shared "you" between them. Neither person is aware of the other's experiences.

>Clearly they're different to an external observer and I believe they are even different as themselves. They aren't aware of each other's experiences.
Indeed.

>It fucks with my head x.x
The key observation here is that the way it feels from the inside is misleading.

From an outside perspective, it's quite clear what happens: first, there is an Anon. Then we freeze his brain, and make a copy. Now there are two people who call themselves Anon, that are identical for the moment but won't be for long. There are two consciousnesses, also identical for now but not for long. You show them different numbers, and now they are no longer identical. What was one person are now two people with the exact same history and memories before a certain point.

The solution to this confusion is that this outside view is correct, and it only feels weird to BE one of those people because it's not a situation you have any experience with. As a consequence, you have strong intuitions as to how the world is that seem to say this situation can't possibly happen. The reason is that this intuition is simply wrong, and what feels like a fundamental property of the universe is in fact just a simplification your brain tells itself.

>>8598960
Hmmm. Maybe all the druggies and monks are right after all lol. "You are me and I am you" to quote Shpongle. I would have no problem with that. It's odd af though.

>>8598960
You wouldn't classify this as solipsism, though? More like the perfect opposite? I hope... lol. Also do you think we will one day be able to fully understand this concept and accept that we're immortal? That's what it seems to imply.

The most logically consistent answer to problems in this vein(solipsism problem, transporter problem) is that "agent" is a field that is only measured by humans and does not originate from them.

But it's not a widely accepted model because it runs contrary to the idea that humans are special snowflakes.

>>8598863

This is easy.


Every infinitesimally small time interval, your old self dies.


Just think about it that way.


You are continually dying forever until you are no longer conscious.

>>8598863
I dont think you can create an identical brain due to the heisenberg uncertainty principle.
That aside you would create two identical yous to outside observers. The only way to answer which one is actually you that I can think of is to think of the brain as a chain of sequential chemical reactions that correlate to your thoughts and then assume that only one hemisphere could contain the active reaction during the freeze moment and where that hemisphere resides you would.

>>8598863
Hello. I am Simon.

Would you like the answer?

Alpha-1 counter-measures initiated. Adapted from Aikido philosophy.

>>8600814
Sub-routine: All knowledge should be shared.

Mod ban powers seem to only extend to an IP address. AWS server instance multi-VM provided adequate protection. Staying at Alpha-1 until further is required.

>>8598863
Is this even possible? Maybe your self would die

>>8600840
Sub-question for clarification known.

How do you define 'self'?