Re: Bruno's argument

From: Quentin Anciaux <>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 22:29:20 +0200

Le Vendredi 21 Juillet 2006 22:08, Brent Meeker a écrit :
> No, the hypothetical was stronger than that: it was that I knew exactly how
> your brain worked to the degree that I could make one.

You could know everything on how my brain works without being ever able
feeling being me... And I repeat if you could then you would be me by
definition. Me is the only one able to feel being me... It is non-sense to
claim otherwise, what ever you could know on the external working and
behavior of myself.

> You certainly don't
> know how your brain works, so while it is in princple communicable, it
> would not be part of your self description.
> >Even when I describe a feeling, I
> > describe it in a 3rd communication way, and you could infer from your own
> > feeling what it would be like, never to be sure it is... because if you
> > were sure of this, then you'll no longer be Brent Meeker, but me.
> I don't think that follows. When I'm sure that my wife is in pain from
> torn cartilage in her knee, it doesn't mean that I am my wife.

Sure, I wasn't talking about this... I was saying that you couldn't know how
your wife feel the pain... You could have an intuition of it comparing your
own feeling... but that's not enough... far from it.

> But in any
> case, being sure is a higher standard than we apply to any scientific
> belief.

I agree.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Fri Jul 21 2006 - 16:29:49 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST