Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Souls
Message-ID: <1665@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Sep-85 23:10:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1665
Posted: Mon Sep  9 23:10:15 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 05:33:47 EDT
References: <581@utastro.UUCP> <1322@umcp-cs.UUCP> <588@utastro.UUCP> <621@mmintl.UUCP> <1626@pyuxd.UUCP> <638@mmintl.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 22

>>>Neither side seems to me to have focussed on the key point here.  It seems
>>>to me that what is being proposed here is that the "resurrection" consists
>>>of the reconstituting of the body more or less exactly like it was just
>>>before death.  Presumably the health will be improved, but at a minimum
>>>the memories and attitudes will be the same.  Clearly this does not require
>>>that anything of the person exist in the interrum (sp?). [ADAMS]

>>If you do what
>>Frank suggests, improving the health in some way, you have altered the
>>person's chemical structure, and thus it is clearly NOT the same person.
>>[ROSEN]

> The key point was that the memories and attitudes be the same.  If this
> is the case, it is not CLEAR that it is not the same person. [ADAMS]

If you alter the person, the "memories and attitudes" of necessity will change.
If you "restore" from a "backup" (oh, god, what a horrible analogy) taken
before the onset of disease or death, then those experiences will not be
incorporated in the restored brain.
-- 
"iY AHORA, INFORMACION INTERESANTE ACERCA DE... LA LLAMA!"
	Rich Rosen    ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr