Why Are We Here?

[Dave to the Grave 11]

With this head to body, body to head transplant theory, as with 'Trigger's broom', we could have immortality.

Same broom, just keep replacing the head and the handle.

[Josco 49]

I've been doing a bit of thinking. If we had head transplants (I know we don't yet but one day we might) and you needed a new head, would it still be you if you got one?

_______________________

Lashings of thought provoking stuff by other DL'ers.................

_______________________

 

So my original answer still stands.

 

No.

[Bald rick 9]

I've been doing a bit of thinking. If we had head transplants (I know we don't yet but one day we might) and you needed a new head, would it still be you if you got one?

_______________________

Lashings of thought provoking stuff by other DL'ers.................

_______________________

 

So my original answer still stands.

 

No.

Do you think you could summarise any other threads like that - there are several that spring to mind.

Eg Post 1: how is So and so?

Post 2: He is fine - and will not be a DL candidate for at least the next 10 years.

Post 3 onwards: I have no relevant information about this person, but what the hell.

Replace above with Josco's handy summary, which replicates Post 2!

If the intervening rubbish could be hidden or deleted too, even better. You could probably strip the whole site down to a couple of comments if you're not careful.

 

The devil makes work for idle moderators...

[Eddy 0]

I've been doing a bit of thinking. If we had head transplants (I know we don't yet but one day we might) and you needed a new head, would it still be you if you got one?

_______________________

Lashings of thought provoking stuff by other DL'ers.................

_______________________

 

So my original answer still stands.

 

No.

 

Wouldn't it actually be the head having a body transplant?

[Godot 149]

Eddy, Eddy, Eddy, I did this for you, got all this flack and this is how you repay me. To Bald rick and the immovable object, the honest response to this thread, loaded with finality, would have been "we don't know", first reply, thread closed. But in the Socratic tradition sometimes it can be interesting (but maybe only to me) to explore an hypothesis.

 

Eddy, how can a mangled head have a body transplant? A mangled head would leave a body needing a head transplant. But why should the head get all the recognition? I know blokes whose whole beings are ruled by other parts of their anatomy.

[CarolAnn 926]

I dunno - I don't see memory as that reliable either. Are we our memories or what we perceive to be our memories?

 

I take a medication that plays holy havoc with my memory, both short and long term. Where most people have complete, intact memories of things, mine are sketchy, spotty or flat unreliable. The big question is, though, if the memories are there and the medication is stopping me from accessing them or if they simply aren't there.

 

I tend to believe they aren't there.

 

Any lawyer or cop will tell you that first hand observers frequently make the most unreliable witnesses, especially if a little time has past. We twist what we think we remember into a "memory" and then go on about our business.

 

I guess that's why I was a little flippant earlier. I'm not sure that what we are has a lot to do with memories. I believe we are molded by events in our lives but I don't think the clear and present recollection of those events is necessary to establish who or what we are.

 

**Reading back over this it sounds kinda hinky. I know what I mean but it isn't coming out like I intend for it to. Oh well.

[deadsox 894]

The bottom line is that the brain is who we are. All else is just parts.

 

Would you say that about Mike Tyson or a Munchkin? There is much more to a person than a brain.

 

While the physique is certainly important, all our thoughts, dreams, personality and what makes us unique rests in our minds. Without a doubt, a woman's beauty or an athlete's skill go a long way into forming their personalities, but it still isn't who they are. The brain is really it, Godot.

[Eddy 0]

Eddy, Eddy, Eddy, I did this for you, got all this flack and this is how you repay me. To Bald rick and the immovable object, the honest response to this thread, loaded with finality, would have been "we don't know", first reply, thread closed. But in the Socratic tradition sometimes it can be interesting (but maybe only to me) to explore an hypothesis.

 

Eddy, how can a mangled head have a body transplant? A mangled head would leave a body needing a head transplant. But why should the head get all the recognition? I know blokes whose whole beings are ruled by other parts of their anatomy.

 

Well, Mr Godot, let me put this to you:

 

If various transplants are performed (head, body and "other parts of anatomy"), and the head states "Hey guys! I'm back and check out this part of my anatomy!", who would I be to contradict him, coz I recognise the tattoo on his arm?

 

Oh, and gratitude never was my forte

[Lady Die 63]

On the subject of transplants this man didn't like the one he was given.

[Eddy 0]

Well, who can blame him.

 

10cm...

 

I'm pretty sure my body would reject that as well

[Godot 149]

I still think there would need to be a law on identity to deal with head transplants, otherwise the new heads are going to start throwing their weight about. If I needed a new head I'd be pretty miffed if that head refused to be me and tried to be someone else. A body should count for something.

[Eddy 0]

I reckon in "Young Frankenstein", what identified the moster mostly was having Abby Normal's brain...

 

Although Inga, bursting out in "Oh, Sweet Mistery of Life" at the end, most likely thinks it's "other parts of anatomy"

[TLC 9]

I dunno - I don't see memory as that reliable either. Are we our memories or what we perceive to be our memories?

 

I take a medication that plays holy havoc with my memory, both short and long term. Where most people have complete, intact memories of things, mine are sketchy, spotty or flat unreliable. The big question is, though, if the memories are there and the medication is stopping me from accessing them or if they simply aren't there.

 

I tend to believe they aren't there.

 

Any lawyer or cop will tell you that first hand observers frequently make the most unreliable witnesses, especially if a little time has past. We twist what we think we remember into a "memory" and then go on about our business.

 

I guess that's why I was a little flippant earlier. I'm not sure that what we are has a lot to do with memories. I believe we are molded by events in our lives but I don't think the clear and present recollection of those events is necessary to establish who or what we are.

 

**Reading back over this it sounds kinda hinky. I know what I mean but it isn't coming out like I intend for it to. Oh well.

I'm pretty much with CarolAnn here, people are so sure of their memories right up until they are presented with cast iron evidence that they were wrong (i.e. video footage of an incident) but still the next time their memory is questioned they will insist they cannot possibly be wrong.

 

As a voluntary destroyer of the power of my own short-term memory through non-prescription therapies, I'm willing to accept that my memory is often rubbish; the thing is though, most people's are just as bad but they back it up with self belief. This is why I almost always lose or avoid arguments, because I'm willing to admit that sometimes I could be mistaken and so people pounce on that schoolboy error with the traditional 'well I'm 100% sure I'm right so you must be wrong' counter.

 

Another interesting thing is how the well documented problem with witnesses' reliability is turned on its head when it comes to unexplained phenomena i.e ufo sightings etc. I'm not particularly a believer, but if 1,000 people claim to see a strange object first hand and so much as one of them has a different idea of what they saw then the whole argument is debunked. This is down to the whole idea of 'if you see something unusual then you're bound to remember it precisely' argument, which is basically a load of toss.

 

A prime example of people's selective/partial memory if ever there was one.

 

I doubt if any one of us who thinks they have really clear memories from early childhood hasn't at least added to the overall picture of the memory through having the story told to them hundreds of times by their parents, friends or whoever. I can equate this with some of my drunken shennanigans, where I've been told stories of my phenomenal exploits so many times that it now feels like I can remember them, although I know I can't.

 

Ironically (well, possibly ironically anyway) I at least partially credit my views on memory and it's sketchiness on the film Total Recall...

[Banshees Scream 110]

'At your service'

 

The maid comes running in

All dressed in white

And pleasently says

'My lady how are you tonight?

Blond and old you reply

Words that are so slurred

She hands you a fork

And gives you the bird

 

The maid comes running in

And you ask 'did you hear my call?'

And she just slowly but gently says

'Well I heard nothing at all?'

And then you finally complain

But she says 'There will be none of that'

She hands you a fork

And gives you the rat

 

The maid comes running in

As outside there is a storm

With sweat running down her face

Your covered with blankets to keep warm

And accidentally your glasses fly off the table

And she said 'O dear my mistake'

She hands you a fork

And gives you the snake

 

The maid comes running in

With a beautiful bouquet

Tucks it underneath your arm

And says 'How are you today?'

You don't give any reply

To what you are told

She places a cup of tea on the table

And it got cold

[Harvester Of Souls 40]

Why are we here?

I was asking myself the same question an hour or so ago.

 

The answer is because none of the other forums are working at the moment... not much changes on the DL.

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

The Son of God (Not) , has a contribution to make here.

[Godot 149]

This doesn't explain the "why". But it says some interesting things about the "here". There are two parts (see right hand panel).

[TAFKAG 70]

This seems like the most prominent philosophy thread, so it'll have to do. John Gray has written a denunciation of the current crop of media-friendly athiests such as Amis, Dawkins and Hitchens. I suppose I'm on their side, but it's nice to read a sober, well-argued and interesting case for the opposition. He's not as funny as Dawkins, mind.

[Typhoid Harry 23]

Future fertilizer.

[deadsox 894]

I recommend a book on the subject, "How To Know God" by Deepak Chopra. I found it quite interesting.

[honez 79]

I recommend a book on the subject, "How To Know God" by Deepak Chopra.

I hope that's not in the biblical sense.

[TAFKAG 70]

A look at the philosophy of the obituary writer. Lots of interesting DL-connected people mentioned, such as Hofmann, Marie Smith, Pavarotti, Fischer, Amte, Ponticelli and Waldheim.

 

Nothing about Dunn, of course. I expect she's still needlessly working on that one.

[DevonDeathTrip 2,358]

Hmm. I've been letting my mind drift recently and have been spending a lot of time exploring an imaginary island. This leads me wonder why I am there and not here?

 

Sorry, just thinking out loud.

[harrymcnallysblueandwhitearmy 1,689]

Hmm. I've been letting my mind drift recently and have been spending a lot of time exploring an imaginary island. This leads me wonder why I am there and not here?

 

Sorry, just thinking out loud.

You're here because you're a moderator, Trip. Now get a grip and get on with your job - a little less thinking and a little more moving pointless and offensive Rolf Harris posts that idiots have put into the wrong thread, if you please.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

That's a bit frightening coming from a moderator, actually.