Suppose I had a machine that could record the position and velocity of ever atom in your body to the limit Mr. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle allows, and then I blew up your body with an H bomb. I now use that information and different atoms to assemble another body. Would you have died in that H Bomb blast?
I don’t know you but I can say that it is virtually certain that you will say yes you are dead because that is what virtually everybody says, even those who pride themselves for unconventional views and for thinking outside of the box. They say that because they believe in the soul, they won’t admit it of course, not even to themselves, and it’s true they do renounce the word “soul”, but the trouble is they just can’t renounce the idea of a soul. I can.
As for why that idea will be lethal after the Singularity; if the Jupiter Brains that exist at that point decide to let you live it certainly won’t be at the same level as their hardware, they would be far too squeamish for that and for good reason, it would be like letting a monkey run around an operating room. If they let you live it will be as an upload, if you refuse that because you think it would be the equivalent to death then your superstition will have killed you. It wouldn’t be the first time a superstition has proven lethal.
No Eliezer you are quite wrong, most people on LE do NOT know that.
better than you do if you’re still talking about “different atoms”.
I debated with myself before using the term “different atoms” when the scientific method is entirely unable to determine if they are really “different” or not, in the end I decided to be generous; even assuming that the atoms were in some obscure very mystical sense “different” would the resulting being be you? Nearly every person on planet Earth would say no, probably even you; but I say yes because I believe the idea behind and not just the word “soul” is BULLSHIT. Almost nobody agrees with me about that, I’m right nevertheless.
John, you have a lot of reading to catch up on before you start preaching to the choir. I know you’re an old hand in the transhumanist community, but if you haven’t been following along on Overcoming Bias, you’re not competent to debate with this crowd. Most people on Less Wrong do know that identity doesn’t follow atoms, because this issue was discussed at great length on Overcoming Bias and resolved. So far as we’re concerned, your pet battle is over, your side won. You can stop fighting now, at least here.
Things like this are the reason I was reluctant to mention LW on any transhumanist mailing list that hadn’t been following along on OB. This is not a forum for transhumanists, it is a forum for people trying to master the art of rationality. They know identity doesn’t follow atoms. We are way, way ahead of you on the reductionist thing. You need to catch up on your reading. In this forum, the upload wars are over and the uploads won. End of story.
Well then, since I am so intellectually deficient in this genius group then prove me to be a fool to the amusement of all, I mean proving somebody to be stupid is one of the great pleasures of life, so do so. Come on Mr. Brains, Mr. Intellectual superior, I dare you to try!
Most people on Less Wrong do know that identity doesn’t follow atoms
You know something, I simply don’t believe you. For about two decades I have been debating this matter and have never found one person who agreed with me, not one. Now you say you have found hundreds, I say bullshit. Hell if we ever got down to the Nitty Gritty I doubt even you wouldn’t agree with me because you must believe in the soul. I mean, I know for a fact that you believe in the friendly AI idea, and the only way that idea is not so stupid as to be strangled by unrestrained giggles is if you believe in some sorry ridiculous permutation of the silly old soul idea.
Yea yea I know, you say you don’t believe in the soul blah blah blah. But you do believe that a slave, sorry I should have said friendly, AI is possible; that tells me what you really think.
All readers, please vote up this comment if you believe identity doesn’t follow atoms. Vote down this comment if you believe that it does. I’ll take my licks if I’m wrong, go on and hit me.
Actually, I’m worried he’s having some kind of breakdown. The Eternally Recurring Personal Identity Wars had plenty of arguers on both sides. JKC was there. Him now talking like he’s the only one who ever believed that deconstruction and reconstruction using “different atoms” preserves identity, may indicate that the Personal Identity Wars really literally did send him off the edge.
I have to say, this is a failure mode I’ve never encountered before:
“You won! It’s over! Look, we all agree with you!”
“NO! IT IS NOT OVER! I AM THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS SIDE AND I AM STILL LOSING, DAMMIT!”
Have you really never seen this before? I actually find that I myself struggle with it. When you define yourself as the plucky outsider it’s difficult and almost unsatisfying when you conclusively win the argument. It ruins your self-identity because you’re now just a mainstream thinker.
I’ve heard of similar stories when people are cured of various terminal diseases. The disease becomes so central to their definition of self that to be cured makes them feel slightly lost.
I haven’t seen it before. Maybe if you counted Stephen J. Gould, but I expect he was lying more than crazy.
I guess most of the people I know are, shall we say, secure enough in their identity as iconoclasts, that they can enjoy winning any particular argument without fear.
Hadn’t heard about the case of the terminal diseases, either.
Actually, I’m worried he’s having some kind of breakdown.
No you’re not, you’re not worried about that at all; you’re trying to be amusing, and doing a damn poor job of it too.
Him now talking like he’s the only one who ever believed
that deconstruction and reconstruction using “different
atoms” preserves identity, may indicate that the Personal
Identity Wars really literally did send him off the edge.
I am a man capable of getting into details, I like details and if truth be told I’m rather good at it, I think details are important; so name one person who agreed with me other than superficially? Come on, name one! Certainly not you, you believe in the childish friendly AI idea. And the only hope of salvaging that is some ugly mutation of the soul ides.
And Eliezer although I’ve said you were wrong and even (perhaps going too far) implied that you were stupid (you have faults but stupidity is not among them) I never in my life said that you were insane as you just said about me.
I am a man capable of getting into details, I like details and if truth be told I’m rather good at it, I think details are important; so name one person who agreed with me other than superficially?
What ramifications and consequences of the ‘atoms are not identity’ belief do you think the upvoters of Eliezer are not thinking about? How is their acceptance superficial?
Actually, I’m worried he’s having some kind of breakdown.
No you’re not, you’re not worried about that at all
Yes I am worried about that. I don’t remember exactly who was on what side in the Upload Wars, but you certainly weren’t the only one lined up for—not just destructive teleportation—but destructive uploading as a computer program.
Greg Egan thinks that if you die and get restored from a backup a day ago, you’re just losing a day’s memories. Even I’m not sure I’d go that far.
Derek Parfit (in the famous mainstream philosophical classic Reasons and Persons) goes farther than either of us by considering the case of incrementally removing and adding memories.
You’re not alone. You were part of a small army of transhumanist reductionist philosophers including a majority of the big names. You were quite well aware of that at the time. Your current stance of lone heroic defiance honestly seems to me to go over the edge of insanity.
All readers, please vote up this comment if you believe identity
doesn’t follow atoms.
In groups of this sort of course everybody says identity doesn’t follow atoms, the word “soul” is not very trendy at the moment; but when you get down to it, when you start debating with them you always find that they do think identity does follow atoms, always, every fucking time; you do too. I say that last because how else can you explain your idiotic friendly AI belief unless we had a soul and the AI didn’t?
Vote down this comment if you believe that it does.
I vote down your comment and you vote down mine. Is this the path to enlightenment? At any rate I freely admit that in this sort or contest you will win and I will not; virtually nobody agrees with me. I am sure you will get an astronomically high rating and I will approach negative infinity. It doesn’t matter, I’ve seen it all before; it doesn’t alter the fact that I’m right and you are wrong, dead wrong.
John, I’m not sure what we can say to convince you you’re fighting a battle that doesn’t need to be fought on this ground.
(other than, perhaps, to suggest that you get some sleep)
Would it help if I said I’d happily sign up to be uploaded now, if I knew I could look forward to a similarly rich experience in a mainframe, and perhaps the ability to engineer a body to walk about in from time to time, when the whim took me?
Would it help if I said I’d happily sign up to be uploaded now,
if I knew I could look forward to a similarly rich experience
in a mainframe, and perhaps the ability to engineer a body
to walk about in from time to time, when the whim took me?
Yes I’d have to say that would help, If you did say it.
Oh. Well then, yes, yes I would. If it meant I could self-modify, and especially if it meant I could gain a bit of control over my pair-bonding mechanisms, then I would in a heartbeat.
I was in the Eternally Recurring Personal Identity Wars in another (non-transhumanist) forum, and there were plenty of arguers on both sides too. I was (and still am) on the “deconstruction and reconstruction preserves identity” side, even before reading Eliezer’s take on it.
I don’t think that quantum mechanics and the lack of “atom identity” is that important; even in a universe made of little billiard ball atoms with each their own identity, I’d still consider that deconstruction and reconstruction with different atoms doesn’t kill you.
Can you be more specific? What do you mean by soul, and why do you think this belief will be harmful?
Suppose I had a machine that could record the position and velocity of ever atom in your body to the limit Mr. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle allows, and then I blew up your body with an H bomb. I now use that information and different atoms to assemble another body. Would you have died in that H Bomb blast?
I don’t know you but I can say that it is virtually certain that you will say yes you are dead because that is what virtually everybody says, even those who pride themselves for unconventional views and for thinking outside of the box. They say that because they believe in the soul, they won’t admit it of course, not even to themselves, and it’s true they do renounce the word “soul”, but the trouble is they just can’t renounce the idea of a soul. I can.
As for why that idea will be lethal after the Singularity; if the Jupiter Brains that exist at that point decide to let you live it certainly won’t be at the same level as their hardware, they would be far too squeamish for that and for good reason, it would be like letting a monkey run around an operating room. If they let you live it will be as an upload, if you refuse that because you think it would be the equivalent to death then your superstition will have killed you. It wouldn’t be the first time a superstition has proven lethal.
John, most people on LW already know this, better than you do if you’re still talking about “different atoms”.
No Eliezer you are quite wrong, most people on LE do NOT know that.
I debated with myself before using the term “different atoms” when the scientific method is entirely unable to determine if they are really “different” or not, in the end I decided to be generous; even assuming that the atoms were in some obscure very mystical sense “different” would the resulting being be you? Nearly every person on planet Earth would say no, probably even you; but I say yes because I believe the idea behind and not just the word “soul” is BULLSHIT. Almost nobody agrees with me about that, I’m right nevertheless.
John, you have a lot of reading to catch up on before you start preaching to the choir. I know you’re an old hand in the transhumanist community, but if you haven’t been following along on Overcoming Bias, you’re not competent to debate with this crowd. Most people on Less Wrong do know that identity doesn’t follow atoms, because this issue was discussed at great length on Overcoming Bias and resolved. So far as we’re concerned, your pet battle is over, your side won. You can stop fighting now, at least here.
Things like this are the reason I was reluctant to mention LW on any transhumanist mailing list that hadn’t been following along on OB. This is not a forum for transhumanists, it is a forum for people trying to master the art of rationality. They know identity doesn’t follow atoms. We are way, way ahead of you on the reductionist thing. You need to catch up on your reading. In this forum, the upload wars are over and the uploads won. End of story.
Well then, since I am so intellectually deficient in this genius group then prove me to be a fool to the amusement of all, I mean proving somebody to be stupid is one of the great pleasures of life, so do so. Come on Mr. Brains, Mr. Intellectual superior, I dare you to try!
You know something, I simply don’t believe you. For about two decades I have been debating this matter and have never found one person who agreed with me, not one. Now you say you have found hundreds, I say bullshit. Hell if we ever got down to the Nitty Gritty I doubt even you wouldn’t agree with me because you must believe in the soul. I mean, I know for a fact that you believe in the friendly AI idea, and the only way that idea is not so stupid as to be strangled by unrestrained giggles is if you believe in some sorry ridiculous permutation of the silly old soul idea.
Yea yea I know, you say you don’t believe in the soul blah blah blah. But you do believe that a slave, sorry I should have said friendly, AI is possible; that tells me what you really think.
All readers, please vote up this comment if you believe identity doesn’t follow atoms. Vote down this comment if you believe that it does. I’ll take my licks if I’m wrong, go on and hit me.
This is shameless Karma whoring. We should ban this user.
Damn right! Eliezer, you should donate that karma to the Singularity Institute.
I think he is implying that we think we agree when we dont really, in that case he would expect us to vote in agreement with you.
Actually, I’m worried he’s having some kind of breakdown. The Eternally Recurring Personal Identity Wars had plenty of arguers on both sides. JKC was there. Him now talking like he’s the only one who ever believed that deconstruction and reconstruction using “different atoms” preserves identity, may indicate that the Personal Identity Wars really literally did send him off the edge.
I have to say, this is a failure mode I’ve never encountered before:
“You won! It’s over! Look, we all agree with you!”
“NO! IT IS NOT OVER! I AM THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS SIDE AND I AM STILL LOSING, DAMMIT!”
Have you really never seen this before? I actually find that I myself struggle with it. When you define yourself as the plucky outsider it’s difficult and almost unsatisfying when you conclusively win the argument. It ruins your self-identity because you’re now just a mainstream thinker.
I’ve heard of similar stories when people are cured of various terminal diseases. The disease becomes so central to their definition of self that to be cured makes them feel slightly lost.
I haven’t seen it before. Maybe if you counted Stephen J. Gould, but I expect he was lying more than crazy.
I guess most of the people I know are, shall we say, secure enough in their identity as iconoclasts, that they can enjoy winning any particular argument without fear.
Hadn’t heard about the case of the terminal diseases, either.
No you’re not, you’re not worried about that at all; you’re trying to be amusing, and doing a damn poor job of it too.
I am a man capable of getting into details, I like details and if truth be told I’m rather good at it, I think details are important; so name one person who agreed with me other than superficially? Come on, name one! Certainly not you, you believe in the childish friendly AI idea. And the only hope of salvaging that is some ugly mutation of the soul ides.
And Eliezer although I’ve said you were wrong and even (perhaps going too far) implied that you were stupid (you have faults but stupidity is not among them) I never in my life said that you were insane as you just said about me.
What ramifications and consequences of the ‘atoms are not identity’ belief do you think the upvoters of Eliezer are not thinking about? How is their acceptance superficial?
Yes I am worried about that. I don’t remember exactly who was on what side in the Upload Wars, but you certainly weren’t the only one lined up for—not just destructive teleportation—but destructive uploading as a computer program.
Greg Egan thinks that if you die and get restored from a backup a day ago, you’re just losing a day’s memories. Even I’m not sure I’d go that far.
Derek Parfit (in the famous mainstream philosophical classic Reasons and Persons) goes farther than either of us by considering the case of incrementally removing and adding memories.
You’re not alone. You were part of a small army of transhumanist reductionist philosophers including a majority of the big names. You were quite well aware of that at the time. Your current stance of lone heroic defiance honestly seems to me to go over the edge of insanity.
John, If you have a unique, opinion, write it up somewhere! If you have a rare opinion, link to explanations from those rare individuals.
In groups of this sort of course everybody says identity doesn’t follow atoms, the word “soul” is not very trendy at the moment; but when you get down to it, when you start debating with them you always find that they do think identity does follow atoms, always, every fucking time; you do too. I say that last because how else can you explain your idiotic friendly AI belief unless we had a soul and the AI didn’t?
I vote down your comment and you vote down mine. Is this the path to enlightenment? At any rate I freely admit that in this sort or contest you will win and I will not; virtually nobody agrees with me. I am sure you will get an astronomically high rating and I will approach negative infinity. It doesn’t matter, I’ve seen it all before; it doesn’t alter the fact that I’m right and you are wrong, dead wrong.
John, I’m not sure what we can say to convince you you’re fighting a battle that doesn’t need to be fought on this ground.
(other than, perhaps, to suggest that you get some sleep)
Would it help if I said I’d happily sign up to be uploaded now, if I knew I could look forward to a similarly rich experience in a mainframe, and perhaps the ability to engineer a body to walk about in from time to time, when the whim took me?
Yes I’d have to say that would help, If you did say it.
Oh. Well then, yes, yes I would. If it meant I could self-modify, and especially if it meant I could gain a bit of control over my pair-bonding mechanisms, then I would in a heartbeat.
I was in the Eternally Recurring Personal Identity Wars in another (non-transhumanist) forum, and there were plenty of arguers on both sides too. I was (and still am) on the “deconstruction and reconstruction preserves identity” side, even before reading Eliezer’s take on it.
I don’t think that quantum mechanics and the lack of “atom identity” is that important; even in a universe made of little billiard ball atoms with each their own identity, I’d still consider that deconstruction and reconstruction with different atoms doesn’t kill you.