Summary
Marocelo
Gleiser's article entitled “Is an Identical Copy of You, You?" that
discusses whether you will be could comfortable dying facing a gun to your head
if you have an identical copy of yourself and author could be uncomfortable because
it is impossible to construct an identical copy.
Journal Response
I think an identical copy of myself
would actually be myself for the world but not for me. When it comes to
identify a person, we must relate the person to the world: he is the son of Smiths,
she is a student in Purdue and so on. The relation of a person to society is the
only way to identify a modern human. Therefore, if a copy of myself possesses all
the relation which is the same as I have, it can totally replace me without any
influence to the world. In other words, the copy would actually be myself for
the world.
Like you, I also think there are two sides to the coin. The point you make is interesting about how we are only human in relation to who we are in society. We can see several instances where, when people are alone for a long period of time, much of their humanity is taken away. Take the famous movie Castaway, for instance, or of the very real linguistic example of the young girl Genie, who never developed language (something we often believe separates us from animals) because of being locked alone for most of her childhood. Aside from our soul, we really do take our identity from others around us. Thanks for sharing, Daniel.
ReplyDeleteThe relation in your article is an important point to the judgement of identical copies. I also think this is a significant evidence. Meanwhile, you say the spirit is another distinction. However, the copy's spirit should be the same as the model or very similar, so there may not some diverse between the copy and the model.
ReplyDelete