Some examples devised by philosophers are
weird but analytically very useful. Take this one by Donald Davidson:
“Suppose lightning strikes a dead tree in a
swamp; I am standing nearby. My body is reduced to its elements, while entirely
by coincidence (and out of different molecules) the tree is turned into my
physical replica. My replica, Swampman, moves exactly as I did; according to
its nature it departs the swamp, encounters and seems to recognize my friends,
and appears to return their greetings in English. It moves into my house and
seems to write articles on radical interpretation. No one can tell the
difference.
But there is a difference. My replica cannot recognize my friends; it cannot recognize anything, since it never
cognized anything in the first place. It can’t know my friends’ names (though
of course it seems to); it can’t remember my house. It can’t mean what I do by
the word ‘house’, for example, since ... [it] was not learned [by Swampman] in
a context that would give it the right meaning – or any meaning at all. Indeed,
I don’t see how my replica can be said to mean anything by the sounds it makes,
nor to have any thoughts.” (source: see below; italics in the original)
Much can be said about this example and
much has been said about it. I think that it gives some answers but raises many
questions, too. Anyway, I think that you’ll agree that Swampman is not
Davidson.
Take now this case by Parfit: “I enter the
Teletransporter. ... This machine will send me at the speed of light [to Mars].
I merely have to press the green button. ... When I [do], I shall lose
consciousness, and then wake up [an hour] later. ... The Scanner here on Earth
will destroy my brain and body, while recording the exact states of all my
cells. It will then transmit this information by radio ... [to] the Replicator
on Mars. This will then create, out of new matter, a brain and body exactly
like mine. It will be in this body that I shall wake up.” Parfit presses the
green button and wakes up on Mars: “Examining my new body, I find no change at
all.” (source: see below)
Next Parfit discusses the relevance of his example
for the problem of personal identity. However, is it possible to be
teletransported in this way? Parfit’s example suggests that the answer is yes,
but after having read Davidson, the answer is clear: No. From Davidson’s
discussion we can learn that Parfit on Mars is not a kind of resumption of
Parfit on Earth. For instance, what Parfit’s Mars-Replica knows was not learned
by him in a context that would give it the right meaning (see above). It’s
simply a copy, just as a copy of a letter is a copy of a letter and not the
original, even though it has the same contents and the same layout. Moreover,
in the case of the teletransport the original has been destroyed, just as
Davidson has been by the lightning in the Swampman example. There isn’t even a
(psychological) continuity between Parfit on Earth and his replica on Mars, as
Parfit thinks, for there is no logical necessity that Parfit on Earth must be
destroyed; just as we don’t need to destroy the original letter once we have
copied it. A copy is not a continuation of the original but duplicate of it.
However, copying Davidson to Swampman or
Parfit to Replica-Parfit doesn’t need to happen all of a sudden. Think of the
Ship of Theseus: Theseus returns from Crete to Athens, after having killed the
Minotaur, and has to repair his ship at sea. He replaces the old planks of the
ship one by one by new ones so that finally none of the old planks of the ship
that left Crete remains. Then the question is: Is the ship that arrives in
Athens the same one as the ship that left Crete? To my knowledge there has
never been given a satisfactory answer to this question. If one looks at the
ship when it left Crete and then again when it arrived in Athens only, one tends to say “no” in view of
Davidson’s case. On the other hand, I think that the sailors had always the
idea that they used the same ship. And how about halfway Crete and Athens? The
questions become even more intriguing, if you realize that man is like the Ship
of Theseus: Man is continuously under construction and reconstruction. Man is
continuously repaired and renewed and after some years none of the molecules we
originally consisted of are yet the same. Then the question is: Are we the same
as we are? You know the answer for yourself but it seems that the Swampman
example is not as weird as it might seem on the face of it. Think about it, and
the more deeply you go into it, the more you’ll discover in it.
References
- Davidson, Donald. “Knowing One's Own Mind”,
in his Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001; p.19.
- Parfit, Derek, Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984; pp. 199, 215.
1 comment:
This is actually just the ship of theseus....
Post a Comment