In what sense is Descartes's dualism wrong?

[Skepdick]

Theoretically, It shouldn't matter if it's physically possible for me or not only if it is possible.

The kind of possibility I care about is tractability.
The kind of impossibility I are about are metaphysical.

If something is not metaphysically impossible, then it's not impossible.

According to quantum physics, there is ever so slightly, remote a chance that atoms could spontaneously come together to form an exact duplicate of me.

Sure. It's called a quantum Boltzmann Brain.

Suppose universes are infinite in number, or whatever physicist believe these days, and that in just one of those infinite universes, I am duplicated.

However, I've heard talk of using quantum entanglement to "teleport" people to distant planets. Apparently, some physicists believe they can perfectly physically replicate a person using quantum entanglement, somehow.

You aren't really addressing my point.

There's still the conceptual issue of whether teleportation is copying you to location B, or moving you from A to B.

If we copy you from A to B, and we don't delete you at . We have effectively cloned you. The world-line of B still has a discontinuity.

[Skepdick]

So are "you" a particular person in space-time, then? How did you come to inhabit your body? I assume you started out as a sperm and egg, at which point "you" had no awareness. Then "you" became aware at a certain age. Why didn't "you" become aware in someone else's body? Why are you aware only in your own body?

"you" and "me" are just a labels. They refer to different things depending on who's using them.

You seem to be struggling with drawing lines in the space-time continuum, and all of your questions are loaded with the pre-supposition that mind and body are separate.

They aren't - they are part of the whole. It we, humans who separate/individuate things (draw the lines) in language. It is we, humans who reduce the whole into parts.

[Gary Childress]

So are "you" a particular person in space-time, then? How did you come to inhabit your body? I assume you started out as a sperm and egg, at which point "you" had no awareness. Then "you" became aware at a certain age. Why didn't "you" become aware in someone else's body? Why are you aware only in your own body?

"you" and "me" are just a labels. They refer to different things depending on who's using them.

You seem to be struggling with drawing lines in the space-time continuum, and all of your questions are loaded with the pre-supposition that mind and body are separate.

They aren't - they are part of the whole. It we, humans who separate/individuate things (draw the lines) in language. It is we, humans who reduce the whole into parts.

Are an apple and an orange not separate things. We use language to distinguish between them. Are you now saying you don't understand what the terms "you" and "me" refer to? You can't just eliminate something by refusing to refer to it anymore. You can stop talking about it but the thing and the differences are still going to be there.

You don't know what right and wrongs are. You don't know what consciousness is. Do you know what a cat and dog are? All I can conclude is that, unlike me, you're not conscious.

[Gary Childress]

If we copy you from A to B, and we don't delete you at . We have effectively cloned you. The world-line of B still has a discontinuity.

If you copy me from A to B and do delete me then I'm dead, right? My clone would continue life but "I" wouldn't, correct? There was something there that was "me" and it's no longer there when you destroy my physical entity. I would no longer feel anything or experience anything. "I" would be gone. Correct?

My question is, what was that "I" that was there and now it's not? It was something distinct from "you". Yes, it seems to be dependent on the brain for its existence but it's not something that can be seen, touched or experienced by anyone else. And yet it was either there or it wasn't.

[Skepdick]

Are an apple and an orange not separate things.

You could view them as separate - you could view them as a system.

Your choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-body_theory

We use language to distinguish between them.

Some times you need to distinguish between thing.
Some times you need to group things together.

Your choice.

Are you now saying you don't understand what the terms "you" and "me" refer to?

No. I am not saying that.

You can't just eliminate something by refusing to refer to it anymore.

But I can eliminate the made up categories you are trying to impose on me.

You can stop talking about it but the thing and the differences are still going to be there.

Only if you believe in mind-independence.

I don't so - who cares? Not me.

You don't know what right and wrongs are. You don't know what consciousness is. Do you know what a cat and dog are?

I know how to use the words "dog" and "cat".
I know how to tell the difference between dogs and cats.

I don't know what dogs and cats ARE. Their "nature" is not part of my knowledge.

All I can conclude is that, unlike me, you're not conscious.

And since you are yet to tell me how I can go about determining my own consciousness for myself, I can't object or confirm your claim.

[Skepdick]

If you copy me from A to B and do delete me then I'm dead, right? My clone would continue life but "I" wouldn't, correct?

If we copy you from A to B and delete you at A, then there will be a copy of you at B.

If you want to label A as "dead" and B as "alive" - go ahead and do that. Your choice.

There was something there that was "me" and it's no longer there when you destroy my physical entity. I would no longer feel anything or experience anything. "I" would be gone. Correct?

Have you heard of Newton's Flaming Laser sword? Great article in Philosophy Now magazine - you should read it: https://philosophynow.org/issues/46/New ... aser_Sword

What measurements or observations would, in your view, settle the matter?

My question is, what was that "I" that was there and now it's not? It was something distinct from "you". Yes, it seems to be dependent on the brain for its existence but it's not something that can be seen, touched or experienced by anyone else. And yet it was either there or it wasn't.

It's a word. I use to refer to myself. It's self-reference. It's recursion. It's the foundation of computation.

That is all we know about it. If you don't like that answre, you will have to come up with a better one all by yourself.

[Gary Childress]

And since you are yet to tell me how I can go about determining my own consciousness for myself, I can't object or confirm your claim.

OK. So you're not conscious. You don't feel pain or see the redness of an apple. I place my hand on a hot stove and I draw it away quickly before cellular damage occurs because it hurts like hell. You place your hand on a hot stove and draw it away quickly because neurons in your brain received signals from your hand which caused muscles to contract, etc, and your arm lifted. Is that correct?

[Gary Childress]

If you copy me from A to B and do delete me then I'm dead, right? My clone would continue life but "I" wouldn't, correct?

If we copy you from A to B and delete you at A, then there will be a copy of you at B.

If you want to label A as "dead" and B as "alive" - go ahead and do that. Your choice.

OK. but I would be dead, correct? I mean, if you destroy my body, I'm dead. My clone would live on but I assume I wouldn't.

[Skepdick]

OK. So you're not conscious. You don't feel pain or see the redness of an apple.

I can say that I do.

You will never know if I mean it, or if I am just playing you a recording.

I place my hand on a hot stove and I draw it away quickly before cellular damage occurs because it hurts like hell.
You place your hand on a hot stove and draw it away quickly because neurons in your brain received signals from your hand which caused muscles to contract, etc, and your arm lifted. Is that correct?

Robots and computers can do the exact same thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt_handler

It's only natural to program your robots with some self-preservation logic - they are expensive, you know?

Temperature sensors triggers alarm.
Invokes interrupt handler for "Protect-from-burny-fire" routine.
Robot removes hand until temperature sensor acknowledges recovery.

In control theory this is called a closed feedback loop.

[Skepdick]

OK. but I would be dead, correct? I mean, if you destroy my body, I'm dead. My clone would live on but I assume I wouldn't.

If you choose to label it as "dead" then it would be "dead".
If you choose not to label it as "dead" then it wouldn't be "dead"

If you choose to draw a distinction between "you" and "your clone" then yes.
If you choose not to draw a distinction between "you" and "your clone" then no.

Your choice.

You are struggling with this "freedom of choice" thing, aren't you? The possibilities are limitless!

Perhaps you want a simpler life? Where all the answers are pre-packaged and gift-wrapped for you?

Perhaps you need an introduction into the Metaphysics of Identity? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

[Gary Childress]

OK. So you're not conscious. You don't feel pain or see the redness of an apple.

I can say that I do.

You will never know if I mean it, or if I am just playing you a recording.

No kidding? That's what I've been saying. If you feel pain, then you are conscious. You have conscious experience. And, yes. it is true. I can't determine if you are conscious anymore than you can me. There's no way to perform a physical test for consciousness.

I'm finished here as far as I'm concerned.

[Skepdick]

No kidding? That's what I've been saying. If you feel pain, then you are conscious. You have conscious experience. And, yes. it is true. I can't determine if you are conscious anymore than you can me.

What a way to miss the point. YOU can't determine if YOU are conscious or not! Because "consciousness" is just a meaningless word!

If I put a lighter to your hand something happens in your head. You move your hand back.

So you've reduced all of what happened in your brain down to the sentence: I felt pain.

Bullshit. How do you know that it was "pain" that you are sensing? How do you know that you didn't sense a "temperature interrupt" routine?

There's no way to perform a physical test for consciousness.

Which is precisely why you can't answer the epistemic question "HOW do you know that you are conscious?".

You have no method for determination.

[Gary Childress]

No kidding? That's what I've been saying. If you feel pain, then you are conscious. You have conscious experience. And, yes. it is true. I can't determine if you are conscious anymore than you can me.

What a way to miss the point. YOU can't determine if YOU are conscious or not! Because "consciousness" is just a meaningless word!

If I put a lighter to your hand something happens in your head. You move your hand back.

So you've reduced all of it down to a false dichotomy: either you feel the pain or you don't.

Bullshit. How do you know that this is "pain" that you are feeling when I put the lighter under your hand?

What if that which you are feeling is exactly what a "temperature interrupt" feels like to a robot whose hand is on fire?

There's no way to perform a physical test for consciousness.

Which is precisely why you can't answer the epistemic question "HOW do you know that you are conscious?".

You don't know it.

Because I know I am. You don't know what I know. Worry about what you know. Are you a solipsist or something?

[Skepdick]

Because I know I am.

HOW do you know, Gary?

What method/measurement/experiment did you perform to obtain this knowledge?

You don't know what I know.

Correct. But I do know what you don't know. I know that you don't know that you are conscious.

Worry about what you know.

I worry about what I know AND I worry about what you know.

I know that I don't know that I am conscious, which is why I am worried that you think you know it.

Are you a solipsist or something?

Far from it.

I am human. That's the only label I care to attach to myself.

[henry quirk]

No kidding? That's what I've been saying. If you feel pain, then you are conscious. You have conscious experience. And, yes. it is true. I can't determine if you are conscious anymore than you can me.

What a way to miss the point. YOU can't determine if YOU are conscious or not! Because "consciousness" is just a meaningless word!

If I put a lighter to your hand something happens in your head. You move your hand back.

So you've reduced all of it down to a false dichotomy: either you feel the pain or you don't.

Bullshit. How do you know that this is "pain" that you are feeling when I put the lighter under your hand?

What if that which you are feeling is exactly what a "temperature interrupt" feels like to a robot whose hand is on fire?

There's no way to perform a physical test for consciousness.

Which is precisely why you can't answer the epistemic question "HOW do you know that you are conscious?".

You don't know it.

Because I know I am. You don't know what I know. Worry about what you know. Are you a solipsist or something?