Resurrection Machine

[Woody]

Frankly, no. To be able to do something right the first time and to be able to continue on doing it perfectly with a minimum of effort would quickly sap the joy out of the activity. Its like giving Mozart a remote control with a 'compose' button on it. Press it and, before you know it, you have a new piece before your eyes. Where is the fun in that? What is the point of existing.

I suspect most individuals would willingly place themself in a form that has at least some of the limits of the human form and mind. They might be vastly and unimaginably greater than what we have now, but not to the point where it saps the fun from everything. Some might even take the role of minor gods, using entire planets as their canvases... but I doubt anyone would remain in a state where anything was just a snap of the fingers away.

I personally enjoy the end result a lot more than the work it took to make it. I enjoy looking back at what I accomplished. It doesn't make the hard part anymore fun, but it does make it worth the effort. Even God had to rest after he created the universe.

 

[Clockwood]

If he needed to rest, it would prove that he is not actually infinite.
If genisis is correct in that respect, he probably just wanted to take the time to look it over at a speed its inhabitants would be using... possibly to help gain perspective of what he had done.

 

[Woody]

If he needed to rest, it would prove that he is not actually infinite.
If genisis is correct in that respect, he probably just wanted to take the time to look it over at a speed its inhabitants would be using... possibly to help gain perspective of what he had done.

God does have needs -- I'm not sure how you conclude he is not infinite. One of his needs is fellowship -- hence he created man.

 

[Sarkus]

This is where I was headed with the discussion -- what makes you "you"?

The definition must narrow down even closer to the human mind. If you lose an arm, then you are still you - less an arm. If you have a brain tumor, and part of your brain is removed, then you are still you conciously, but your behavior is altered.

Brain.
It is the brain that makes you "you".
And it is everything within the brain - not just memories.
When you lose an arm you do feel that a piece of "you" is missing - as your brain still wants to think that it is there (hence the "phantom limb" syndrome).
The rest of your brain - your reasoning faculties etc - then begin to override that lost part of you and adapts.

We are more than just memories - we are also the physical neural connections and pathways.

Implant the memories into a different neural structure and it will behave differently to me.
Implant the same memories into an absolutely perfect copy of my neural structure and it will still be different to me - as from the time the copy is "switched on" it will experience different things from me.



This also brings me to the matter of "Star Trek" - and how they casually "beam" people left, right and centre. (Ok - I know this is a little left-field for this discussion... but hey! )
What they are basically doing each time is killing the person, and then creating a perfect clone of them at the other end.
The clone will have all the memories and will, to all intent and purpose, think they are exactly the same person as went into the transporter initially.
But they aren't.
They are a clone.
To everyone else they will seem the same - and the clone himself won't know any difference - but the original will have been destroyed!

The consciousness of the person will have died with that person.
The new clone will have their own consciousness.

So, with each use of the transporter another person dies!!

Think about that the next time you watch Star Trek!!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

... This has been done with cloning. ...

Not true at all.

Naturally occuring clones happen all the time.

What do you suppose Identical Twins are, but Natural Clones?

A clone only makes a new individual with an identical gene matrix. What happens after that is highly dependant on the environment in which the new genotype is raised in.

Even in animals, with their simplier behaviorial patterns, you'll just get a new individual, who happens to share the gene matrix with another.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

... So, with each use of the transporter another person dies!!

Think about that the next time you watch Star Trek!!

Maybe. Perhaps.

Is true ONLY if there are non-physical aspects of being.

That is, if you assume that the transporter disasembles ALL of the atoms and reasembles them exactly like they were prior to disasembly, including any and all electrical/chemical states of all the cells.

All the physical stuff - the stuff made up of atoms.

Now, if there is such a thing as "spirit" or "soul" then your answer may be true. (That is, some form of existance that is beyond the physical stuff - a supernatural existance.) But only if the soul is not 'smart' enough to 're-attach' to the new body - remember the process only takes seconds, and people have experienced 'death' for longer periods than that without apparent ill effects.

If the soul is NOT re-attached to the body, where does the "new" body get it's soul? Or does it even have one?

 

[Cottontop3000]

Personally, I think that in a hundred years, maybe two hundred at the outside, recussitation of cryonically frozen dead humans will be possible. At that point in time, the debate about the "soul" will be over, one way or the other.

 

[duendy]

Personally, I think that in a hundred years, maybe two hundred at the outside, recussitation of cryonically frozen dead humans will be possible. At that point in time, the debate about the "soul" will be over, one way or the other.

i find the whole idea of cryonics sad sad sad. a modern equivalent of the Egyptian belief and pactice of mummification. in latter it was assumed that te muummmy--usually pharoa or a 'higher up' needed theri body kept mummified sos tey could return, etc

now this idea very modified is actual so-called resurrection

this is complete patriarchal buull crap. the fear/rejection of death, and change. thenorealizing that Nature is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR moree --and some--intelligent than these silly little scifi heads hoping to 'take over' the process, and creating ecocide and all forms of abusrudities when it gets above its self, or up itself, mo like!

 

[Cottontop3000]

Alright, alright. Let's just wait a little while, and maybe we'll see. Rather, maybe I will see, and you won't. Give it 200 years.