Poll for atheists

[Fluffy]

In a distant future, a new way or traveling between planets has been found. They call it teleportation

 

But you know better, it doesn't put you in another place, what it does is read all data from your molecules and reproduce them on destiny. To read your molecules a ray disintegrates every atom of you in a nanosecond retrieving all the data. So althou in a sense you travel to destiny, it can also be said that a copy of you gets there and you instantly die to achieve it.

 

There were some accidents past century, but now its a totally safe techonology used intensively. Some people prefer to travel months in a saceship to go to other planets, but they are freaks.

 

 

 

NOTE 1: There are many ways to ask a question like this, please try not to dodge the main question which I think its clear with non important details in the presentation.

NOTE 2: This is not aimed to attack atheists on any way nor to prove anything, the reason why I ask this is because I often try to think as if I didn't believe and when I approached this question I had no clue what to answer.

[Vampyr]

From "Who Mourns for Adonis":

Mankind has no need for gods. We find the one quite adequate.

 

So apparently he was a believer. And he used the transporter. The connection between the two is, I'm afraid, a mystery to me.

[mikeh]

Of course I would use it....and who, having grown up watching star trek wouldn;t?

 

I think a much more interesting question is to suppose that somehow it was possible to map every finctionalor relevant aspect of brain function and then program a computer to function precisely as does your brain, including all memories and personalities, such that anyone interacting with the computer would other than physical appearance, see no difference...the computer program being in theory immortal.....and the condition of doing this would require the same physical destruction.

 

Why is this different? becaus in fluffy's situation, we are physically identical, while in mine, we are instantiated in whatever material is used to make the computer. In the one case, we are physical cells in the same condition as the original and indistinguishable thereform...not so in the second

[BillHiggin]

As I see the premise, it appears to me to be much more of a problem for those who believe in a "soul" than for me. If I die but an exact copy which includes all my memories and life experiences continues, then that copy is me. But the religious folk must worry about the possibility that their true soul is now standing at the pearly gates while a new version continues life (with a new "soul"?).

 

Of course, once this technology (which probably is actually not a possibility) is developed, someone will immediately note that it is a fairly simple modification to create multiple copies at the same time! Let the clone wars begin.

[Vampyr]

But the religious folk must worry about the possibility that their true soul is now standing at the pearly gates while a new version continues life (with a new "soul"?).

 

Ah, right. Now I see the connection. LOL.

 

Of course, once this technology (which probably is actually not a possibility)

 

No, if teleportation is ever developed, I imagine it will involve some sort of quantum entanglement.

[kenberg]

I voted that yes I would use it. The explanatory notes helped. But I would probably want to hear more about it before climbing in. It isn't that I would worry about my soul, but I am not exactly convinced that my conscious being is the sum of my atomic parts either. It's a little tricky.

[Winstonm]

If the exact configuration occurs the same person occurs - the self follows from the hard wiring of the physical body. No problem.

[hautbois]

Does the machine on the other end -- the one reproducing my molecules -- does it set them in motion with the same velocity and acceleration they had before?

 

I'd use it if it were demonstrated to work. I'm skeptical that can happen.

[gwnn]

Sorry I don't wanna dodge anything but if they tested it on rats and small mammals, then they've been using it on humans for a long time, surely it's safe now? I mean, I can find hundreds of people who've already gone through the procedure and ask them? Is this a question related to the human soul or one on the problem of induction?

 

In unrelated news, Sam Harris wrote a nice, short book on the free will (titled aptly enough 'Free Will'). One interesting image was about a serial killer who is just about to start murdering his victims. The question was "Would *I* also commit the crimes if I was in his place?" and then going in the depths of the question, e.g. what if I really had the urges he had? What if I had the same tendencies too? What if all our molecules were identical?

[kenberg]

If the exact configuration occurs the same person occurs - the self follows from the hard wiring of the physical body. No problem.

 

Perhaps yes, perhaps no. This could be a difficult premise to even formulate exactly and probably impossible to scientifically investigate. The travel agents for the device would no doubt insist that it is so. The truth of it is not obvious to me. I think the best that I can say is perhaps it is so.

 

I'm not the first person to find the concept of consciousness somewhat mysterious.

[StevenG]

No, you're still dead.

 

The fact that there's a clone out there doesn't help you.

 

[Edit] To clarify: the illusion of continuity of consciousness will exist for the clone (and every one else). There's no reason why it should for you.

[Winstonm]

Perhaps yes, perhaps no. This could be a difficult premise to even formulate exactly and probably impossible to scientifically investigate. The travel agents for the device would no doubt insist that it is so. The truth of it is not obvious to me. I think the best that I can say is perhaps it is so.

 

I'm not the first person to find the concept of consciousness somewhat mysterious.

 

Research into neuroscience is young but the earliest findings indicate that consciousness is a product of chemical and electrical activity.

[helene_t]

I mean, I can find hundreds of people who've already gone through the procedure and ask them?

uhm .... you can ask 100 people that have had a heart transplant and 100% of them are still alive :)

[GreenMan]

I've never bought the idea that an exact duplicate with my memories etc. will also be me. I view my own consciousness as a continuous progression tied to my physical self, and I don't believe it will make the jump to a new self; that other one will act the same as me, but it will be some other me, not the me that makes the decision, as StevenG also said.

 

I don't believe one has to be a narcissist to believe that having a second one of oneself would be a good thing; maybe we could finally get caught up on housework and so forth, take turns staying home and going to school, etc., or choose both sides of a major life decision. But that's a different question.

 

The Star Trek franchise touched on this question in the novel Spock Must Die! way back when. The movie The Prestige went at it from another direction; in both cases the teleportation process did not destroy the original, and the story is about the ramifications of that.

 

It's a worthwhile question.

[nige1]

A down-to-earth analogy is identical twins -- newborn -- or just conceived.

[Trinidad]

A down-to-earth analogy is identical twins -- new-born -- or just conceived.

I don't think so.

 

And remember that identical twins are not conceived. They are formed after conception.

 

Rik

[gwnn]

uhm .... you can ask 100 people that have had a heart transplant and 100% of them are still alive :)

That wasn't my point. Fluffy already made it clear that it works perfectly fine (wrt accidents), so safety is not an issue. But you can ask the people who have gone through the procedure whether they feel any different after teleportation and/or to see for yourself whether they have zombie eyes or a fake soul. Indeed for people who believe that the heart is essential for emotions or the human soul, talking to heart transplant patients could be productive.

[barmar]

Does the machine on the other end -- the one reproducing my molecules -- does it set them in motion with the same velocity and acceleration they had before?

if it's been demonstrated to work, then they must be close enough that you can't tell the difference. Isn't that what it means for it to "work"?

[squealydan]

I'm 44. I think I'm basically the same person I was when I was 34, with a little more life experience. Yet I think I'm right in saying that at least 99% of the atoms in my body are different to the ones I had when I was 34. Or maybe it's just 99% of the cells, with the atoms shuffled from one place to another. So it must be true that my "me-ness" for want of a better word, is independent of the physical arrangement of certain cells within the body.

 

I'm not sure if this is at all relevant to the question at hand (I voted yes I'd use it, with practical questions about its safety being the only ones that would worry me). But it's thought-provoking none-the-less....

[mike777]

Research into neuroscience is young but the earliest findings indicate that consciousness is a product of chemical and electrical activity.

 

 

How do you define and measure consciousness?

 

In medicine, consciousness is assessed by observing a patient's arousal and responsiveness, and can be seen as a continuum of states ranging from full alertness and comprehension, through disorientation, delirium, loss of meaningful communication, and finally loss of movement in response to painful stimuli.[6] Issues of practical concern include how the presence of consciousness can be assessed in severely ill, comatose, or anesthetized people, and how to treat conditions in which consciousness is impaired or disrupted.

 

 

I think we all can see the problems of definition and measurement with the above. It kind of starts with a halfass definition and method of measurement and comparison.I mean what is the margin of error and confidence levels? :)