Queue on 2/2/2011 at 20:31
I guess I'm just taking it as given that an individual's brain, be it pudding or not, will develop an individuality.
SubJeff on 2/2/2011 at 20:35
Quote:
if biology makes no difference, and if the mind is a predictable system, then someone with exactly the same experiences is exactly the same person.
This was the key factor in the OP. That's why I said
Quote:
But that's because you are excluding some factors and the lack of variability (
since you're taking it that far)
In reality I don't think you can take it that far because we are all inherently different and therefore the "Stim-Response" model is flawed. It'd work on simple AI though. I think that once you get to a certainly level of cognitive complexity there will be a degree of chaos (if you want to call it that) or variability that prevents identical information processing and thus identical "experience".
Koki on 2/2/2011 at 20:36
To experience the life in an identical way you would need to be identical on the molecular level anyway.
Sulphur on 2/2/2011 at 20:42
Quote Posted by Koki
To experience the life in an identical way you would need to be identical on the molecular level anyway.
That. Essentially what I was saying earlier. Jesus, Koki finally makes a point.
demagogue on 2/2/2011 at 20:50
I think, to put it very simply, it comes down to the fact that Sherrington, Pavlov, & Skinner were wrong with the stim-response brain model. At least two big elements missing are on-line economics (functional) processing & "personality & worldview" (narratives of self and world), both of which are not entirely developed by experience alone.
...............................................
Edit: As for the response, "you'd need a molecule-for-molecule clone". First, I'd add it'd not just be a perfect clone of you, but of the world of experience around you too, in which case you have a very good philosophical argument that these are no longer 2 different people anymore, but the same person. (Edit: Vivian beat me to it, except I meant it in the hard sense that there's no way to physically distinguish them.)
But aside from that, I think it's better to put it in functional terms altogether, what actual work those extra molecules are doing. I think it's better to think of a model of the mind (self, behavior) that involves online economics processing & narratives of self and culture directed towards experience, which systems have hardcoded (genetic) elements but are still quite plastic and adaptive too, in complicated dynamic ways with strange attractors, so 2 minds can go vastly different ways with the same experience.
Briareos H on 2/2/2011 at 21:58
Quote Posted by Koki
To experience the life in an identical way you would need to be identical on the molecular level anyway.
Nobody actually knows but IMO that's giving far too much credit to the uniqueness of mind constructs. Vivian is probably on the right track with chaos theory. Since biological memory is basically an attractor generator, changing some random seed somewhere might yield similar results for similar architectures (this doesn't take into account psychological instability though - you'd always get slightly different behaviour on unusual brain pathways). Would need more research mixing psychology and complex systems theory.
On a more philosophical note, the problem with "If I'd experienced exactly what you experienced throughout your life" is that you're putting yourself in the place where you're already the same person. That's what demagogue is trying to get at by shoehorning phenomenology philosophy in a slightly clumsy manner: since the construction of the self is a movement of continuous phenomenal integration, if you have experienced exactly what this virtual "other" has experienced, then it can only be from a first person perspective and you can't be discernible from him.
Kolya on 2/2/2011 at 23:07
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
fffffuuu
You clearly didn't get the question. What
if you had? It's a thought experiment.
No one is influencing anyone here, the question is what if
you had had exactly the same experiences as me? Judging by your recent posts you'd be smarter that's for sure.
The question does not exclude the possibility that both persons exist.
"If I'd experienced exactly what you experienced throughout your life, I would feel/believe the same way that you do."Depending on how you read that, it actually requires both persons to exist, because otherwise there'd be no one to compare to. So that "thought experiment" of yours is just that,
your thoughts. And I had a different take on it than you. I hope you can still sleep.
Renzatic on 2/2/2011 at 23:12
I'm probably repeating what's been said above, but this is my take on the matter.
If you were to take two identical human entities, and expose them to the same experiences, you would still end up with slightly different personalities between the two at the end of. Each of them having an identical genetic makeup would introduce a bias towards certain things, but wouldn't guarantee that they'd respond to certain situations exactly the same.
Say Person A had a headache one day, and experienced Situation A, that would color his opinion on the matter, which would then color other experiences from there on out. One small change would end up causing a vast divergence, and you'd end up with two separate people by the end of the experiment.
Take away the biological factor, the headache, and you'd still end up with the same results. You have two identical human beings, each with the exact same biases towards things. With this in mind, would they be thinking of the exact same things at the exact same time? Obviously not. A simple thought of something occurring to Person A that didn't occur to Person B at the moment of Situation A would change the outcome of the experience for each of them.
Like Vivian stated above, the mind is a fairly chaotic thing, and has a billion and one things influencing it internally and externally. Punching Person B in the face will influence the outcome of the experiment as much as a subtle emotion brought about by an old memory. So even if you have two identical people starting in the exact same position, they'll still end up in very different places by the end.
tl;dr it's butterfly effect, dood. I totally saw that movie.
Kolya on 2/2/2011 at 23:26
The answer hinges on ill defined terms, eg
"experienced exactly what you experienced". What constitutes an "experience" in this context? Is a headache an experience? How can you have the same experiences without the same biology? Say one is born as a man and one a woman.
Might be interesting to look at twins research. But ultimately the answer is (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29) mu.
SubJeff on 2/2/2011 at 23:29
Quote Posted by Kolya
T
Depending on how you read that, it actually requires both persons to exist, because otherwise there'd be no one to compare to.
The question doesn't require a comparison between another person who has really existed because it's a theoretical question.
Furthermore in order to experience the exact same thing you'd have to occupy the same space and time so good luck with two people doing that.
But I digress, I'm being needlessly awkward with you. I think you've missed the point of the question which is, essentially; given identical biological, temporal and physical characteristics and experiences will there be interpersonal variance in the way someone responds to that particular life.
It's a question about choices and differences. If you had had the same experiences as me, or the drug dealer on the corner, would you have turned into me or that drug dealer, respectively? Or is there something else, some spark (I guess we're calling it chaos itt) that differs between people?
I think there is something of the butterfly effect in it. A headache is a useful fulcrum because you just don't know when you're going to get one so it's not a personality difference per se (though if you wanted to be uber-anal about it these two theoretical people would have all headaches at the same time bleh). But if we take the headache as an event that alters experience then even something as small as that could, via the butterfly effect, vastly alter someone's life.
I find films that use this (such as The Butterfly Effect) very interesting because I often wonder how different things would have been if I'd made different (but simple) choices.
