Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: More Atheistic Wishful Thinking
Message-ID: <1560@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 09:06:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1560
Posted: Thu Sep 12 09:06:24 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Sep-85 09:39:01 EDT
References: <696@utastro.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 18

In article <696@utastro.UUCP> padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan) writes:

>Yes, but the point is that Charley rejects the notion of soul, while claiming
>that "he" will be resurrected. If the soul is not there to ensure continuity,
>then he cannot say for certain that it will be "him" that is resurrected,
>and not just a copy (of many copies perhaps). He must claim that either
>all copies are indeed Charley, which is absurd, or give up claims of 
>identity on being resurrected.

To be more precise, what I am rejecting is the notion of souls *in the form
of* supernatural beings which are somehow linked to physical people.  If you
choose to identify the soul with the information comprising a person, then I
have no objection-- but such a soul is obviously not supernatural, even
though it isn't physical either.

As for identity of copies, I've already discussed that in this group.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com