The no person argument 1

File name: The no person argument Date: 01:47:01 AM 03/03/09

Tying issues of survival and immortality to personal existence and identity is inadequate in getting a correct and complete understanding

The ideas that our ixperiencit is tied to a specific body and not to consciousness can be totally incorrect. Thus it is more appropriate to tie one's ixperiencit to consciousness than to a body. Consciousness does not have the problem of tying itself to the wrong awarepaducer or type of awarepaducer. You are making an assumption that easily can be wrong.

The no person argument

We do not really know what is producing the consciousness that we are experiencing. We think it is the body so we think that the study of survival and immortality is tied to the study of the human bodies.

We can imagine a consciousness being produced that is totally artificially stimulated (artificially produced sensepath) to believe it has a body by creating a sensepath that is identical to one that a person with a body has. This consciousness can be produced by a brain in a vat stimulated by a computer created sensepath. So this is really not a person at all just a brain. We can also consider an electronic device that creates the consciousness of a body with out having anything like a human body. In this case there is no biological brain and body but thee is the human awarepath created where this consciousness thinks that he is a person. Another way is by a fitoprocess where there is nothing like a body, a brain or even a singular object that is producing the consciousness, nonetheless, the consciousness produced is that of a person. In these cases we may think that we have a body and we are a person but in reality we are nothing of the sort; the importance of personness is eliminated. It is a consciousness that thinks it is a person but is a consciousness. This shows the importance of existence and identity of consciousness over personal identity and existence. When we see ourselves as a body rather than as consciousness we see only a very limited aspect of our full actual and potential existence

Some one might say that this is not a possibility you have to have the consciousness of a person produced by a person but what is the proof of this. This might mean that there can not be any deception of a consciousness every consciousness has to represent reality but we know that this is not the case our brain have the ability to produce many aspects of consciousness that can not be in reality. We have not reason to believe that a brain that is properly stimulated by a computer would not think that it was connected to reality and not to a machine. The machine reality may seem more real than having a real body. Some one might argue that this can never happen that we have to have a human body to produce the consciousness of a human. But his is just speculation with out empirical proof. Just because a black swan does not exist and never has existed doesn't mean that they can not exist and will not exist in the future. With the understanding of genetic engineering it seem very likely that they can exist.