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