On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> >If there are OMs which don't
> > remember being you then they are not going to be part of your stream of
> > consciousness.
>
> There's the rub. Almost all my OMs *do not* include consciously
> remembering being me (or anyone). And if you suppose there is an
> *unconscious* memory component of an OM then there's a problem with what it
> means to have an unconscious part of consciousness.
Well, how do you maintain a sense of being you in normal life? If you are
absent-mindedly staring at a tree you at least have a sense that you have
been staring at the tree, rather than drowning in the ocean a moment ago.
You are also aware that you haven't grown 10cm taller or suddenly changed
sex - that is, you would immediately be aware of these things had they
happened, even though you are not actively thinking about them or their
absence. So a bland sameness from moment to moment constitutes a sense of
memory and continuity of identity, since an OM that deviated substantially
from this would either not be considered as a successor OM or immediately
alert you that something strange had happened.
Stathis Papaioannou
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sun Mar 18 2007 - 23:35:32 PDT