|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
Who are WE, really....?
#7442002 - 09/22/07 10:10 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I was watching a philosophy lecture, and the professor went thru the following example - the jist of it anyways.... 
OK, so you have a wooden ship called "MaryJane".... It is 50 years old, VERY well traveled, has a loyal crew, the wood has rotted, and is no longer safe and sea-worthy.... So, one by one, each board is removed and replaced with a new board.... Now you have a sea-worthy vessel, and the original crew takes her out to sea.... But then the question came up - Would they ship still really be the "MaryJane".....?
And then, if you took all of the materials discarded from the original "MaryJane", and you reassembled them into the original ship again, would that shit really be the "MaryJane".....?
The conclusion to the story was that neither one of the ships would be the "MaryJane"....
So, upon pondering this, I thought about the human body on a cellular level.... Within a cycle of (4?) years, all of the cells in a human body have died and been replaced with new ones (some faster than others).... So, are we really who we are/were as time passes on thru the years....? Being that we are literally constantly dying and being replaced with new materials, even though the Captain of the vessel may still be the same....?
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442018 - 09/22/07 10:14 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
We are our awareness, our sentience or whatever else we determine that we want to be 
And some of us get high , not that it would have anything to do with the topic, but I thought it's worth mentioning
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442021 - 09/22/07 10:15 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Why wouldn't the first ship still be the 'mary jane'? Same design, same crew, she's just been extensively repaired. Each board was replaced one by one right? They didn't build a brand new ship from scratch, just fixed the old one. The framework is still the same. There is a continuity between the original and the repaired ship, just like the human body replacing it's cells. Our personalities don't disappear with the death of old cells, we remain continuous. Both the ship and the person retain thier original identity through the repair process, so they are the same boat/person.
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7442072 - 09/22/07 10:32 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
My first thought were that BOTH of the ships would be the MaryJane.... It would be like a clone - but with clones, there would be two separate names - thus the dilemma with my first thought....
It was a lecture by a Philosophy & Neuropsychology Professor, Daniel N. Robinson - a highly accomplished doooood.... He stated that neither one of the ships would be the MaryJane....
I thought for sure that at least the reassembled ship would technically be able to KEEP the name, because the only thing it lacked was the crew (and lacked the ability to be sea-worthy)....
But alas, that wasn't the conclusion to his lecture.... 
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#7442077 - 09/22/07 10:38 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MushroomTrip said: We are our awareness, our sentience or whatever else we determine that we want to be  . And some of us get high , not that it would have anything to do with the topic, but I thought it's worth mentioning
But, as we age, the core and structure of our sentience also changes - sometimes in very big ways.... Experience - or even just time itself changes us, in mind and body....

>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442087 - 09/22/07 10:42 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The fact that we're always changing doesn't mean that we're not ourselves anymore. It can only mean that when we don't keep us up to date who we presently are.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442092 - 09/22/07 10:43 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
ALL objects are actually processes. Spacetime is not just for physics.
The ship is called Mary Jane for convenience, but really should have a time stamp for every time she is viewed like different frames in a movie reel or video. "Hey isn't Mary Jane 09/20/07 21:40:33 a real beauty?"
The map (word) is not the territory (object).
Quote:
even though the Captain of the vessel may still be the same....?
WTF? Why would you assume the Captain is the same? Is he/it not also a process or are you arguing for a changeless soul?
--------------------
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: ALL objects are actually processes. Spacetime is not just for physics.
The ship is called Mary Jane for convenience, but really should have a time stamp for every time she is viewed like different frames in a movie reel or video. "Hey isn't Mary Jane 09/20/07 21:40:33 a real beauty?"
The map (word) is not the territory (object).
Bravo Orgone, particularily the Borges quote (the map is not the territory.) My favourite.
|
wolfiexiii
Oddity


Registered: 06/24/07
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 7 days
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#7442113 - 09/22/07 10:52 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
the interesting point of that though (being your essence and not your body) is the question of can we transcend our bodies into new bodies =) and would it be moral and ethical to persue such endeavors.
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: wolfiexiii]
#7442116 - 09/22/07 10:54 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
What does it have to do with morals or ethics?
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442125 - 09/22/07 10:56 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PhanTomCat said: My first thought were that BOTH of the ships would be the MaryJane.... It would be like a clone - but with clones, there would be two separate names - thus the dilemma with my first thought....
It was a lecture by a Philosophy & Neuropsychology Professor, Daniel N. Robinson - a highly accomplished doooood.... He stated that neither one of the ships would be the MaryJane....
I thought for sure that at least the reassembled ship would technically be able to KEEP the name, because the only thing it lacked was the crew (and lacked the ability to be sea-worthy)....
But alas, that wasn't the conclusion to his lecture.... 
>^;;^<
Well if a highly educated doooood said it, it must be true, right? So the rest of us should doubt our own insight? Trust yourself! Philosophy is not conclusive, it is highly subjective. It's a fun thought-game with no answers. Don't let someone's PhD. cause you to distrust your perception.
|
wolfiexiii
Oddity


Registered: 06/24/07
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 7 days
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#7442137 - 09/22/07 11:00 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
the morals and ethics come in the question of how? our current bodies wear out... so how do we replace them? While we can't transfer who we are yet, it should in theory be possible even if terribly difficult... so the moral and ethical question could be asked should we?
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
|
Your first part makes sense, a lot of sense....  It pissed me off that he didn't explain WHY, like you have here.... 
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
even though the Captain of the vessel may still be the same....?
WTF? Why would you assume the Captain is the same? Is he/it not also a process or are you arguing for a changeless soul?
What I meant by this is that your identity and characteristics are still "you" (as the Captain (you) would still be the "same" person - as recognized by others).... On the mental/soul aspect, yes I understand that most everything is in a state of flux - due to the passing of time....
I just didn't understand how in his conclusion that is essence, neither of the ships could still be the MaryJane - when the "identity", function, shape, and such would be the same for both, one just lacked the original crew and sea-worthy ability.... But also, the other one had lacked the "experience"....
So, if you had the two ships as mentioned above (in a time stamp with both ships in existence), and I said "Lets go sailing on the MaryJane", which ship would we meet at....?
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: wolfiexiii]
#7442153 - 09/22/07 11:06 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
What is this 'essence' you keep speaking of that is separate from the body?
Awareness or "I" is an emergent property of neuronal function. It is not something added to nor distinct from the body. Might as well try to remove the blue from the sky.
--------------------
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442164 - 09/22/07 11:09 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Lets go sailing on the MaryJane", which ship would we meet at....?
Use the specific space-time coordinates instead of clumsy fixed labels.
--------------------
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7442173 - 09/22/07 11:13 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
NiamhNyx said: Well if a highly educated doooood said it, it must be true, right? So the rest of us should doubt our own insight? Trust yourself! Philosophy is not conclusive, it is highly subjective. It's a fun thought-game with no answers. Don't let someone's PhD. cause you to distrust your perception.
I had my conclusions, but there really doesn't seem to be an answer to the story if you tear apart all aspects of it.... That was my conclusion anyways....!
I just wanted to mention where I had heard the story, and who had come to the conclusion - and then discuss it.... Doesn't mean that I agree with him.... 
It was my idea to apply the "model" of the story to the human body and mind - and the conclusion he gave doesn't seem to work out in this aspect.....
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
stellar renegade
explorer ofmetaphysicaldepths



Registered: 09/19/07
Posts: 201
Loc: carrollton, tx
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: wolfiexiii]
#7442184 - 09/22/07 11:16 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
wolfiexiii said: the interesting point of that though (being your essence and not your body) is the question of can we transcend our bodies into new bodies =) and would it be moral and ethical to persue such endeavors.
Been reading too much That Hideous Strength lately...?
MACROBES! MACROBES!
Here come the heads, the chosen heads, of the BODILESS MEN!
(courtesy of Blaster the Rocketman, ala The Monster That Ate Jesus)
-------------------- "I threw a small stone down at the reflection of my image in the water, and it altogether disappeared. I burst as it shattered through me, like a bullet through a bottle... and I'm expected to believe that any of this is real!" -mewithoutYou
 "To believe in the wide-awake real, through all the stupefying, enervating, distorting dream: to will to wake, when the very being seems athirst for godless repose: these are the broken steps up to the high fields where repose is but a form of strength, strength but a form of joy, joy but a form of love." -George MacDonald
Edited by stellar renegade (09/22/07 11:18 PM)
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....



Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: What is this 'essence' you keep speaking of that is separate from the body?
Quote:
PhanTomCat said: I just didn't understand how in his conclusion that **IN** essence, neither of the ships could still be the MaryJane - when the "identity", function, shape, and such would be the same for both, one just lacked the original crew and sea-worthy ability....
My bad, typo..... 
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
wolfiexiii
Oddity


Registered: 06/24/07
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 7 days
|
|
No, just on a light shroom trip.. 2 grams nibbled over about 4 hours...
i just added that book to my library waiting list tho... thank the king country library's online book system =)
|
stellar renegade
explorer ofmetaphysicaldepths



Registered: 09/19/07
Posts: 201
Loc: carrollton, tx
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: Who are WE, really....? [Re: PhanTomCat]
#7442239 - 09/22/07 11:33 PM (16 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PhanTomCat said: Being that we are literally constantly dying and being replaced with new materials, even though the Captain of the vessel may still be the same....?
He may as well have used the story of the Tin Man, since it is basically the same. The (former) man's body parts were replaced by tin over time until he was made completely out of tin.
It's an interesting question. I think it really boils down to, what kind of philosophical idea of identity are we talking about?
I mean, if the crew still regarded the ship with all the replaced parts as the Mary Jane they have always sailed in, I wouldn't begrudge them their right to still call it by the same name. After all, the memories transferred over time and the two ships overlapped - while they were still sailing with much of the old ship, the new ship became incorporated into the identity of the old. After all, we're not talking about the technical identity, as might be described by a number, but a sentimental one. We've all heard captains, in stories at least, call their vessels "she".
Hmmm, you know what? This might actually make an interesting story to write someday. 
Anyways, I think there's a certain philosophical problem to surmount when saying that the yesteryear you is not the same as the present or future you. Don't we still regard all of them as 'us' - at least, to some degree? Don't we say, "I wish I had done better at that," or "I wish I had had a better childhood"? It seems that transcendent of all the flux of time, emotions, experiences and lessons in character (thanks, Calvin's dad) there is something which still remains the same, not separate from everything, but intimately a part of it all.
Perhaps Inner Christianity has been right all along.
-------------------- "I threw a small stone down at the reflection of my image in the water, and it altogether disappeared. I burst as it shattered through me, like a bullet through a bottle... and I'm expected to believe that any of this is real!" -mewithoutYou
 "To believe in the wide-awake real, through all the stupefying, enervating, distorting dream: to will to wake, when the very being seems athirst for godless repose: these are the broken steps up to the high fields where repose is but a form of strength, strength but a form of joy, joy but a form of love." -George MacDonald
|
|