Posted by Squiggles on October 16, 2007, at 13:40:32
In reply to Re: Designing drugs and Hume's Analogy, posted by unbottled on October 16, 2007, at 12:56:09
> It's entirely a matter of definition. One could
> say, for instance, that the ship is a bunch of
> things including molecules that are designed to
> be replaced bit-by-bit. So it *is* a ship.
> One could also say that a ship is not a ship once
> it's permanently docked on display. Not a ship.
>
> Now. If we could only figure out whether taking
> Nardil is really cheating ..There is no question that it *is* a ship;
the question is, is it the same ship? Of
course it may not matter from a utility
point of view-- e.g. knock-off products that
look, smell, and work identically, the only
distinguishing mark being the original patent.
I think generic drugs aspire to that, but i
offered an argument in a previous post where
they fail to meet the mark due to different tests.With regard to personalities, i think that
memories are the most significant tests for
change in "global" personality; but there
are other traits where parts of a personality
may change permanently, or transiently due
to the causes discussed. If a brain were
entirely replaced with another of different
"hardware" but identical "software" you would
not be able to tell the difference. Nor would
the person be different. But if significant
aspects of the personality were changed, those
observing the person they knew, would detect
the change. The person himself, would not I think, as that would require either two memories,
or two brains. If confronted with "what has
happened to you, you're not the same person anymore", chances are rationalizations and
fabrications would be the defensive response to
a threatening question.Sorry to go on about this -- it's really curious.
Squiggles
poster:Squiggles
thread:789384
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20071009/msgs/789598.html