Maybe we ain't us?

[Tanker]

This reminds me of a slower more naturalist version of the the Clone/transporter moral paradox.

[AlP]

You are the processes, not the materials.

Yeah I agree. And I think the processes would diverge at the point of split on account of receiving different sensory input.

The psychology textbook I've been reading says children learn to identify themselves around 15 - 18 months. By age 8 - 10 they have a stable sense of self image.

But I think it's all a big (though useful) evolutionary trick! There is no self as we think of it, just a sophisticated parallel process running in a brain. The idea of cloning the process seems mind blowing because it's at odds with our inaccurate concept of self.

[LoneMateria]

You are the processes, not the materials.

Yeah I agree. And I think the processes would diverge at the point of split on account of receiving different sensory input.

The psychology textbook I've been reading says children learn to identify themselves around 15 - 18 months. By age 8 - 10 they have a stable sense of self image.

But I think it's all a big (though useful) evolutionary trick! There is no self as we think of it, just a sophisticated parallel process running in a brain. The idea of cloning the process seems mind blowing because it's at odds with our inaccurate concept of self.

I don't remember who said this about our perceptions but, "Our world view is very messed up.  We are on a rock, mostly covered in gas, circling a giant fireball and we consider this normal." (come to think of it Dawkins might have said it) Our brains still have a hard time grasping the very large (cosmos) and the very small (atoms).  Unfortunately most days we have to work under the assumption that what we perceive is accurate though it really isn't.