Hi Squad
Roger wrote a while ago:
> 4) Copying "objectifies" the self - The self is an objectified, or
> subjectified, intellectual abstraction. Per p229, RMP sarcastically refers
to
> the self as the "little editor," and an "impossible fiction".
> Why can't this fiction be recreated?
I won't pretend to have an answer to your question but I have done
some thinking about it. The phrase "copying objectifies the self"
might sound like philosophical mumbo-jumbo and I guess it is until
I show some examples to illustrate what I mean.
When we copy the original, we will take inorganic samples of it.
Each such sample is a Quality Event, or observation to use quantum
physics terms. As far as I know (anybody correct me if I'm wrong),
evidence indicates that our memory are stored using sub-atomic
quantum functions. This and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle means
that inorganic observations can't extract all information stored in
these functions, i.e. we can't extract our memory without distorting
it.
I wouldn't say that memory is the same as the self, but I do think
it's an important part of it. Any explanation of the intellectual
abstraction we call "the self" will most likely include the memory.
I would also guess that other parts of such explanations will suffer
greatly from our copying.
So, back to the phrase then, "copying objectifies the self", maybe
a better formulation would be "copying collapses the quantum functions
of the self", but I have a sinking feeling they are almost equivalent.
Magnus
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:35 GMT