How do people STILL believe in a soul? - Page 6 - Religion, God, and Theology

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

Electrons are completely indistinguishable from each other (in the fullest sense possible). Yet we seem to have a somewhat fair understanding that there can be such a thing as two electrons that aren't the same electron. So I don't think the last line really works.

I don't mean to say (as per your example) that they're the *same* electron, just that both are electrons.

Quote:

You and I are both (presumably) human. But I'm sure there are all sorts of differences between us, yet we agree we're both human. I think that there are some details being swept under the rug with your concept of "100% indistinguishable" because of the vagueness of what it actually implies.

By 100% indistinguishable I mean exactly that, the same in every way (so far as anyone can, or ever will, tell)—physically identical.

Assume an alien race created and sent an exact copy of you to your doorstep. Is or isn't this alternate Aaron human?

Assume an alien race created and sent an exact copy of your doormat to your doorstep. Is or isn't this alternate doormat a doormat?

Mr Muck McFold · 06-20-2012, 04:05 PM

Stupid pointless apes!

Aaron W. · 06-20-2012, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

I don't mean to say (as per your example) that they're the *same* electron, just that both are electrons.

Right. I'm just saying there's no inherent contradiction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by you

For someone to do so it would seem they're holding contradictory views.

We cannot both say X=Y and X≠Y.

I think the last line *CAN* be said. Two things can be completely identical and be distinct, and this is not strange at all.

Quote:

By 100% indistinguishable I mean exactly that, the same in every way (so far as anyone can, or ever will, tell)—physically identical.

Assume an alien race created and sent an exact copy of you to your doorstep. Is or isn't this alternate Aaron human?

Assume an alien race created and sent an exact copy of your doormat to your doorstep. Is or isn't this alternate doormat a doormat?

Let's go back to your original statement, because I think something got lost in translation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by you, two quotes lumped together and paraphrased

So, if a robot could be made such that it's 100% indistinguishable from human... it would be a human

What is a robot? What is a human? What do you mean by a robot that is 100% indistinguishable from human? Is it a robot?

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zumby

We can go a bit further here.

Imagine there is a device which will scan you, read all the details on your atoms and 'teleport' a facsimile to another location by annihilating your atoms in one location and arranging a perfect copy in another location.

A strict materialist would probably reason that a perfect copy of you IS you. If you believe in a immaterial soul, then you would probably not want to try the teleporter.

1) Imagine you see various people go through the teleporter. Will you be able to tell whether or not they have a soul and, if so, by what means?
2) Same question, but you accidentally walk into the teleporter. Will you have a soul, and if not, how will you tell the difference?

I think the above is a slightly different question, namely "what is self"? The difference between the two topics, I think, could be served well with the hammer analogy: If a old hammer has had two different heads, and three different handles, in what way can it be said to be the same hammer?

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

What is a robot? What is a human? What do you mean by a robot that is 100% indistinguishable from human? Is it a robot?

What is a robot?: A machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically.

What is a human?: (we went over this earlier)

What do you mean by a robot that is 100% indistinguishable from human?: A (necessarily biological) machine that meets enough characteristics to be qualified as human.

Is it a robot? Yes, it's a robot and a human. I could say the same thing about "traditional" humans.

zumby · 06-20-2012, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

I think the above is a slightly different question, namely "what is self"?

What is the soul supposed to be if not 'self'?

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zumby

What is the soul supposed to be if not 'self'?

I meant from the materialist's viewpoint.

zumby · 06-20-2012, 04:36 PM

I'm interested in the theists properly defining the soul (as per my request to RLK which is still unanswered) so I can avoid strawmanning

Aaron W. · 06-20-2012, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

What is a robot?: A machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically.

What is a human?: (we went over this earlier)

What do you mean by a robot that is 100% indistinguishable from human?: A (necessarily biological) machine that meets enough characteristics to be qualified as human.

Is it a robot? Yes, it's a robot and a human. I could say the same thing about "traditional" humans.

So now we're starting to unwind what appears to be a more intricate web of words that not everyone would agree with. Specifically, very few people would consider "traditional humans" to be a robot.

Under the broad definitions that you seem to be applying here, I would agree that the duplicate me would be a "human" and a "robot" and a "duplicate" and probably a "me" as well. Though I would have to admit at this point that I'm not really sure if any of this is meaningful.

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

So now we're starting to unwind what appears to be a more intricate web of words that not everyone would agree with. Specifically, very few people would consider "traditional humans" to be a robot.

Under the broad definitions that you seem to be applying here, I would agree that the duplicate me would be a "human" and a "robot" and a "duplicate" and probably a "me" as well. Though I would have to admit at this point that I'm not really sure if any of this is meaningful.

To put it another way, most materialists would agree humans are some sort of biological machine. Robots, by definition, are machines capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically. Therefore, humans are a type of robot, even if it seems silly to classify them as such.

Mr Muck McFold · 06-20-2012, 05:10 PM

Stupid pointless Robots!

Aaron W. · 06-20-2012, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

That's fine, I'm just not sure if those who don't define robot to encompass humans are being intellectually honest. Every definition of robot I've found would seem to encompass living organisms, so long as you can include biological functions under the umbrella of "machinery".

The broadening of definitions continues... You ought to see how far this trail goes.

Aaron W. · 06-20-2012, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdfasdf32

To put it another way, most materialists would agree humans are some sort of biological machine. Robots, by definition, are machines capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically. Therefore, humans are a type of robot, even if it seems silly to classify them as such.

You changed your post.

But now we're getting somewhere. There is a sense in which the narrowing of definitions begins to make sense. The phrasing here opens up the ability to say something like the alien duplicate is a type of human. Would you agree?

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

The broadening of definitions continues... You ought to see how far this trail goes.

Bah! I deleted that because I didn't want to go down that path. Awe well.

In an event, I'm not sure what the issue is. Countless people have (correctly IMO) described living organisms as biological machines.

asdfasdf32 · 06-20-2012, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

You changed your post.

But now we're getting somewhere. There is a sense in which the narrowing of definitions begins to make sense. The phrasing here opens up the ability to say something like the alien duplicate is a type of human. Would you agree?

I suppose it would apply, but it seems only as meaningful as saying you're a type of human, I'm a type of human, etc. I would say the duplicate Aaron is the same type as you are.