Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

reignofevil posted:

I think that just because I'm not conscious of being dead doesn't mean I don't experience it!

I mean you literally don't though. Like you experience the fear up to that point, other people experience you dying, but you yourself can't actually experience death, unless you believe in an afterlife.

So like, normal dying is bad because 1. you're afraid of it. 2. other people will miss you, and 3. your potential future will not be experienced by anyone, but all three of those don't apply with the transporter because it perfectly copies you and you only use it if you're not afraid of it for whatever reason, either because you don't think it kills you or because you don't care that it does.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
I see what you're saying, but like lets say I get hit by a gigantic fuckoff rock or something instead of stepping into a transporter. I'm dead as hell. Now let's say that this happens while I'm in my bed sleeping. Once could argue that 'I never experienced death' sure sure, but I'm still dead as poo poo. I guess the point I'm making is 'experiencing' death is completely immaterial to whether or not you are dead. Just because in the moment I step into the transporter and I die I'm instantaneously dead and my consciousness has ceased and I am not in some kinda astral plane sitting around thinking 'man it sucks to be dead' doesn't really mean that me dying wasn't, to me, a big deal. It also doesn't mean it didn't happen to me or that in any way I've sidestepped the whole 'does it suck to be dead' question*.


*In this case I'm defining 'does it suck to be dead' as 'can I continue drinking myself to death? if no, it sucks to be dead.'

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

According to the fictional science of Star Trek, life can exist as a form of pure energy, so the existence within the transporter buffer does correlate with that interpretation of contiguous life. Murder teleporter interpretations are usually entirely separate works of fiction with their own entirely separate fictional science. All the ontological quandaries rest on top of a mountain of if/then suppositions where you can cleanly create your own fundamental premise that supports your desired worldview.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

reignofevil posted:

I see what you're saying, but like lets say I get hit by a gigantic fuckoff rock or something instead of stepping into a transporter. I'm dead as hell. Now let's say that this happens while I'm in my bed sleeping. Once could argue that 'I never experienced death' sure sure, but I'm still dead as poo poo. I guess the point I'm making is 'experiencing' death is completely immaterial to whether or not you are dead. Just because in the moment I step into the transporter and I die I'm instantaneously dead and my consciousness has ceased and I am not in some kinda astral plane sitting around thinking 'man it sucks to be dead' doesn't really mean that me dying wasn't, to me, a big deal. It also doesn't mean it didn't happen to me or that in any way I've sidestepped the whole 'does it suck to be dead' question*.


*In this case I'm defining 'does it suck to be dead' as 'can I continue drinking myself to death? if no, it sucks to be dead.'

Yes, you're dead, and everyone else will experience you being dead, and the things you might have done will never be done, and those things are bad. But it's not really bad for you. You wouldn't know the difference.

But if you got hit with a big fuckoff rock and then a perfect copy of you reappeared in the same spot and the old one disappeared, aside from being a bit confused, nobody would notice or care, least of all you, because one of you would be dead and not in a position to care, and the other would be alive with just as much sense of being you as you have right now.

Essentially I guess I'm arguing that "you" can never "be dead" in a sense because "you" cease to exist at the moment of death, so the only way you can be dead is from other people's perspective. You can fear death, and other people can experience your death, and a lot of the time the bits leading up to dying suck poo poo, and all of that's bad, but you personally can't actually become dead, it doesn't really make sense if you really think about it.

Of course if you don't really think about it then yeah it's still weird, but if you're not really thinking about it as a star trek person then transporting is just totally normal and nearly everyone comes out exactly as they went in and it's safer than the shuttlecraft and they don't seem dead to me so eh, whatever :v:

OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Jan 29, 2020

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

OwlFancier posted:

Yes, you're dead, and everyone else will experience you being dead, and the things you might have done will never be done, and those things are bad. But it's not really bad for you. You wouldn't know the difference.

But if you got hit with a big fuckoff rock and then a perfect copy of you reappeared in the same spot and the old one disappeared, aside from being a bit confused, nobody would notice or care, least of all you, because one of you would be dead and not in a position to care, and the other would be alive with just as much sense of being you as you have right now.

Essentially I guess I'm arguing that "you" can never "be dead" in a sense because "you" cease to exist at the moment of death, so the only way you can be dead is from other people's perspective. You can fear death, and other people can experience your death, and a lot of the time the bits leading up to dying suck poo poo, and all of that's bad, but you personally can't actually become dead, it doesn't really make sense if you really think about it.

Of course if you don't really think about it then yeah it's still weird, but if you're not really thinking about it as a star trek person then transporting is totally normal and nearly everyone comes out exactly as they went in and they don't seem dead so eh, whatever :v:

I'm still not getting in that transporter Geordi.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

I'd try to make it so that I had to transport as much as possible in public and loudly announce to everyone every time we did it that continuity of self is an illusion and you have to embrace the fact that you are nothing but a sufficiently similar copy of the person you were yesterday and all the transporter does is make that slightly more literal.

And then they will say "sir this is the 10 o clock service to luna please either get on the pad or leave you do this every day"

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


reignofevil posted:

I think that just because I'm not conscious of being dead doesn't mean I don't experience it!

Actually yes. If you are not conscious of something that means you don't experience it.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Actually technically the particles making up the atoms in your body are always forming and reforming which means that we actually don't exist as the literal same person from moment to moment so if you wrong people were right then we die billions of times per second.

Think about it.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
I don't think it's controversial to say that my lifeless body, though no longer capable of producing electrical signal or chemical reaction, is still me. Therefore I still experience death even if I never realized that it happened. The reason for this is that death is a blanket term for anything that is no longer alive and simply by being alive right now it is impossible that at some point I won't experience death, regardless of whether I can experience, have an opinion or form any kind of a process with comprehending it.

edit- cleaned up the language a bit

reignofevil fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Jan 29, 2020

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

CainFortea posted:

Actually technically the particles making up the atoms in your body are always forming and reforming which means that we actually don't exist as the literal same person from moment to moment so if you wrong people were right then we die billions of times per second.

Think about it.

I don't think that this process makes me dead because despite it happening to me I continue to drink. Getting hit with a giant rock makes it very clear that I'm dead because my alcoholism ceases. The transporter complicates the process somewhat by making a perfect clone of my liver and my alcoholism but I assure you I am not fooled by this. My atoms forming and reforming is very different than being instantaneously converted into energy on 100% of your bodymass.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


reignofevil posted:

I don't think it's controversial to say that my lifeless body, though no longer capable of producing electrical signal or chemical reaction, is still me.

It's not controversial, just wrong.

Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

CainFortea posted:

It's not controversial, just wrong.

Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.

Why

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

Remember when they used the transporter to de age Pulaski, inventing immortality, and then I guess forgot about it

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

Remember when Barclay had transporterophobia and started seeing sand worms from Dune during the dematerialization process and so at the end he grabbed one and it turned out to be people trapped in the buffer

A Gnarlacious Bro
Apr 25, 2007

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

OwlFancier posted:

I'd try to make it so that I had to transport as much as possible in public and loudly announce to everyone every time we did it that continuity of self is an illusion and you have to embrace the fact that you are nothing but a sufficiently similar copy of the person you were yesterday and all the transporter does is make that slightly more literal.

And then they will say "sir this is the 10 o clock service to luna please either get on the pad or leave you do this every day"

me too

Angepain
Jul 13, 2012

what keeps happening to my clothes
i can't wait until we finally come up with a definitive answer for the problem of consciousness here on the temporary star wars shitposting section of a deceased homosexual internet discussion forum

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
I've assembled a crack team of experts!

Cactus Ghost
Dec 20, 2003

just call me ...

AMERICAN MUSCLE
the idea that you're not dead because the pieces you were chopped into are small enough and there was a convincing enough copy made is dumb

how big can the pieces get? how convincing does the copy have to be? can you just hanzo me in half and replace me with a cardboard standee? if not, where's the line where you supposedly aren't "dead" because "you" haven't "experienced" "death"

e: in this scenario, will my screaming upper half and the large pool of blood spoil the idea for my loved ones that the cardboard standee is "me"? as opposed to cutting me in half elsewhere, concealing my bisection from them, and placing the standee somewhere they expect me to be for "them" to "find" "me"

Cactus Ghost fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Jan 29, 2020

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004



Because you aren't just your meat bits.

nine-gear crow
Aug 10, 2013





zoux posted:

Remember when they used the transporter to de age Pulaski, inventing immortality, and then I guess forgot about it

Same when it turned Picard, Ro, and Guinan into literal children.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

CainFortea posted:

Because you aren't just your meat bits.

I really am though. Sure those meat bits are capable of sending electro-chemical signals but ultimately there is no woo woo soul or anything we just are a collection of neurons that happen to fire off in response to a variety of stimuli. That's what life is and that's why when you get a concussion it's bad because you permanently damage the part of yourself that makes up your ability to respond to stimuli.


Edit- And once those bits die, you die. Once you die, regardless of if you still maintain an opinion on it, you experience the process of death and begin to rot. The parts of you that once functioned cease to do so but that did not make them suddenly not you in any meaningful way.

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

nine-gear crow posted:

Same when it turned Picard, Ro, and Guinan into literal children.

Probably best they forgot about that one

Cactus Ghost
Dec 20, 2003

just call me ...

AMERICAN MUSCLE

nine-gear crow posted:

Same when it turned Picard, Ro, and Guinan into literal children.

this is what makes TNG fun to rewatch; it could be big cerebral scifi and it could also be just, fuckin Direct To DVD dumb and be entertaining either way

e: also the late80s early90s hair

bloom
Feb 25, 2017

by sebmojo
I have also read the squid book

Presto
Nov 22, 2002

Keep calm and Harry on.
Today's SMBC is relevant.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


reignofevil posted:

I really am though. Sure those meat bits are capable of sending electro-chemical signals but ultimately there is no woo woo soul or anything we just are a collection of neurons that happen to fire off in response to a variety of stimuli.

Right, but the you that experiences things is a product of all of that, not just the meat bits. If you have the meat bits and not the signal bits, the you that can be said to experience things is gone.

Big Dick Cheney
Mar 30, 2007

OwlFancier posted:

I'd try to make it so that I had to transport as much as possible in public and loudly announce to everyone every time we did it that continuity of self is an illusion and you have to embrace the fact that you are nothing but a sufficiently similar copy of the person you were yesterday and all the transporter does is make that slightly more literal.

And then they will say "sir this is the 10 o clock service to luna please either get on the pad or leave you do this every day"

This guy gets it

hakimashou
Jul 15, 2002
Upset Trowel

Angepain posted:

i can't wait until we finally come up with a definitive answer for the problem of consciousness here on the temporary star wars shitposting section of a deceased homosexual internet discussion forum

derek parfit already did

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

yeah thats pretty good


When you go into the transporter there's a tiny window between when they take a snapshot of your current state and vaporizing your body. During this window you subjectively experience a thousand lifetimes of superhell.

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

Presto posted:

Today's SMBC is relevant.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

reignofevil posted:

I don't think it's controversial to say that my lifeless body, though no longer capable of producing electrical signal or chemical reaction, is still me.

If that's true it's pretty hosed up that your friends and family bury you in the ground or set you on fire once you stop moving.

That's sort of the whole point of the funerary process is to help people to process the disconnect between you, who existed while you were alive, and your corpse, which looks like you, but is not you.

Asimov
Feb 15, 2016

Even if you just normally exist on earth, practically all of your atomic matter has been changed out or "regenerated" after a few decades. One's beliefs, values, and other ineffable qualities also change dramatically. How similar is 5-year-old you to graduating high-school you? How about 15 years after that? You've died the small death a thousand times, and the belief that you have a continuous unaltered "soul" or consciousness is malarkey. But on the other hand, that belief is what makes us human and we can accomplish various things due to our motivations that are tied to our ideas of being independent, rational living beings. Thank you for listening to my Ted talk.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

OwlFancier posted:

If that's true it's pretty hosed up that your friends and family bury you in the ground or set you on fire once you stop moving.

That's sort of the whole point of the funerary process is to help people to process the disconnect between you, who existed while you were alive, and your corpse, which looks like you, but is not you.

That's only hosed up if you've got some predisposition to not being in the ground or on fire imo. People have different thoughts on this, my mother wanted turned into a diamond after she died and split into two so that both I and my brother could carry her around as a ring.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008

Asimov posted:

Even if you just normally exist on earth, practically all of your atomic matter has been changed out or "regenerated" after a few decades. One's beliefs, values, and other ineffable qualities also change dramatically. How similar is 5-year-old you to graduating high-school you? How about 15 years after that? You've died the small death a thousand times, and the belief that you have a continuous unaltered "soul" or consciousness is malarkey. But on the other hand, that belief is what makes us human and we can accomplish various things due to our motivations that are tied to our ideas of being independent, rational living beings. Thank you for listening to my Ted talk.

This feels like throwing my hands in the air and saying 'well you're always changing!', the problem here is I can conceive of some of my traits as fundamental and I can view death through the lens of whether those traits can continue to express themselves. Just because I grew out of tomato soup doesn't mean that the person who that liked tomato soup died a 'small death', rather one tiny part of me was shed as dead taste bud cells and replaced by another. Sure sure if you look at me across the decades I've shed _all_ of my bodies cells from a decade prior but I didn't do it all at once and my body never ceased the behaviors I'd label as fundamental. You can take your sailboat dilemma elsewhere we can boil this down entirely to the utility of me getting good and plastered and notably of our three scenarios, full cellular replacement via natural cell splitting can happen every decade and yet I'm still getting drunk. The giant rock squishing me scenario leads to a cessation of my fundamental behavior, being a drunk, and while the transporter may seem to complicate things by creating an identical alcoholic the moment I die it doesn't really change any of the important facts re: me continuing to drink.


As a follow up what precisely is a 'small death'. It sounds like a wishy washy term that doesn't have nearly as much importance as what we'll call Death. Note the capital D because that's the 'big death'

Asimov
Feb 15, 2016

We're all gonna be hydrogen but if you get comfort from carrying the atoms of your departed ancestors then so be it. Personally I don't think that 100 kg of human matter is enough to actually create a 1 karat diamond so these companies are probably selling bullshit. They may contain, "a certain amount" of material but yes let's trust 3rd party artificial diamond manufacturers to reliably process your loved ones' remains into carbon instead of their normal industrial process.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
Oh hell no I thought the idea was dumb as hell and creepy I'm just saying that you can't account for what people believe about being dead there's all kinds of thoughts about how much of a corpse represents 'yourself' and it's part of why we have laws against defiling graves!

Asimov
Feb 15, 2016

Fair enough, and I respect your points as a man of science. Regarding the post above, yes, "you're always changing!" is a pedantic argument. The idea of whether a single person has fundamental traits that persist through their entire life is an interesting notion. From my personal perspective, it all ultimately boils down to the concept of Self. What are you, as a person?
- The person that you think you are, even though it may change over decades?
- The person that others perceive you as, even though different people perceive you differently?
- The memories that others will have of you, after you are deceased?
- The ideas that you have imparted unto others, long after you have passed (aka your forum posts, or the lessons you taught your biological or adopted children)?

The transporter dilemma is a fun one because it can be boiled down to, "how can you be sure you are the same person after any cessation of consciousness, like sleep?" And while we have some evidence about how things work I look forward to experiments on the brain, consciousness, and how it impacts the perception of self. If we had the advanced medicine to surgically remove the brain and nervous system from a human body, would it remain sentient, or lose something of itself? Hopefully we don't have to do experiments on actual humans to learn these things but I get the impression that the next few decades of research will move closer and closer to this. Like, nematode memory experiments extrapolated to mice. Someone will try to create a mouse embryo that can find its way through a predefined maze from instinct or something similar, imo.

reignofevil
Nov 7, 2008
Talking about what constitutes being dead precisely is really fun and I'm glad to get to do it here on these dead gay forums :)

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

There's a theological question in there, but it's pretty simple to say that if there is any such thing as a soul or whatever that means, the sci-fi technology could be calibrated to transfer it along with the rest of the matter and junk. It's a bit of a tautological thing, "If this thing was done, is it then not actually done? Well by definition it was done."

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cactus Ghost
Dec 20, 2003

just call me ...

AMERICAN MUSCLE
why is it that nerds assume any discussion of intangible elements of self requires a supernatural element? it doesn't require a supernatural ghost to discuss things like personality, others' perceptions and memories of you, or your sense of conscious self-awareness, or even to describe those things as a "soul".

also there is still a continuity of consciousness through sleep. you're in an altered state but your brain is still there, functioning, sometimes in a consciousnstate (dreaming) and you will still react to external stimuli. the fact that there's a gap in your memory afterword doesn't mean it's the same as you being killed and a copy printed elsewhere. the subjective experience for the printed copy might be similar, but they're not the same.

Cactus Ghost fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Jan 30, 2020

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply