X-Message-Number: 16160
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:55:51 -0400
From: Jeffrey Soreff <>
Subject: Re: Important question for the isomorphists

on Sun, 29 Apr 2001 11:57:08
Louis Epstein wrote:
>Computerized entities are not persons,and wisdom rejects any definition
>of person that includes them.

As far as I can tell, a sufficiently good simulation of a person would
have the same subjective experience and the same social interactions as
a biological person.  I, for one, would include such simulations in the
same category of persons as the biological ones.  Please display the
"wisdom" that persuades you to exclude them.

>Neurosuspension,as I stated,I consider a bad joke...and if no new
>organic body can be created for the severed head,there is no point
>in attaching it to a substitute.

So there is "no point" in reviving a biological brain if it is to be
attached to a non-biological body?  You do realize, don't you, that
there are a _lot_ of people walking around with partially "substitute"
bodies?  Do you have any fillings in your teeth?

                                    Best wishes,
                                    -Jeffrey Soreff

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16160