>what is your consciousness?>what makes you "you"? If humanity invented an atom replicator which allowed you to stand in one place, be scanned for every atom in your body, then that info is sent across the world to an atom replicator that basically reassembles atoms in your same exact configuration. Thus teleporting "you". The old body is instantly cremated. From the outsiders perspective they think it's still you. You sound the same, have the same mannerisms, look exactly the same. But what if you aren't the same "you". You're a different soul/person/consciousness and nobody knows it because from the outside you're the same. >is this effectively the same thing as death? >what if everyone was using these machines and called you weird for not?>what if your wife wanted to use one, and thought your little theory was stupid, would you let her? Would it make a difference to you if the "her" that made "her" was destroyed but replaced by a non-her replica?
If the “you” who steps into the machine ceases to experience anything (i.e., your stream of consciousness ends), this would feel like death to the original “you,” even if the replica continues as if nothing happened.
>>39267009"You" are just your memories. There is no "I" that resides uniquely in you, that's spirituality 101 - consciousness is collective, individual consciousness is an illusion. What makes you you is your ego as defined and shaped by your memories and experiences in life, and as long as those are intact, you're still you. This is one of the least interesting sci fi scenarios imo, the implication is completely dispelled by basic spiritual knowledge.
>>39267009The best thought experiment for this is what happens if your "cremation" mechanism fails?Then there are now 2 copies of you. It's basically just a long distance cloning machine.So then what happens? It's easy to say it's "lol teleportation" when the death/life occurs at the same moment, but now that you're 2 copies what does it mean for them to just kill one of the copies? All of a sudden it just looks like murder rather than teleportation.You are a conscious being that is not reducible to matter.
>>39267041Where does the conscious live? In the brain? Would a brain transplant still be "you" in a new body?
>>39267009Humans are already disposable trash. What's the difference between this and believing in that you step into a different universe everytime you sleep?
>>39267009>New phone>Who dis?
>>39267009We could clone you while you're still alive. It's happened to a sheep before. We could split you in two and both could grow a new. Plants can, I'm not sure about worms.
Chat gpt >>39267914 says certain worms can (planarians)
>>39267009If I swap atoms with you, 1 atom at a time, at what point do we become each other?
>>39267032if we could just rebuild the molecules and cells exactly, but this is a challenge which prevents conscious cloning. also pee is stored in the balls.
>>39267914Genetic cloning != Atomic cloning retard. There has never been an atomic clone of a living being and will probably never be for the simple reason that you can’t scan every atom without breaking down the living cells.
>>39267037>When people get amnesia, they die.
>>39267091Well you probably won't believe this, but my view is that consciousness does not live inside material, but material (or the appearance of it) resides in consciousness.I get that it sounds dumb, which is why I resisted this idea for years.But no matter how much I thought about where consciousness comes from that seems to be the only possible solution to the problem... The funny thing is it's a really trivial answer, so why don't we accept it more easily? Even though it makes perfect sense and is a valid solution to the question, the human mind wants to reject that idea for some reason.
>>39267009that's not teleportation, that's cloning with extra steps.
>>39267009the continuance of the continuity of the individual is indivisible.
