Who Am I?

...You, sir, just blew my mind.

Well, I know who I am, of course. Don't I?

Yes, but anyone can identify you by an aspect of you, it doesnt even have to be a very accurate one. I know who Julius Caesar is but never met him and can't say for certain he ever existed. Even fictional characters like Flash Gordon fit that criteria of being known even though their identity is completely arbitrary.

What is personal identity, exactly?

A consciousness of self, and it's not limited to humans. Dolphins and Chimps can recognize themselves in mirrors and have a concept of self. Since all living things are hard wired to protect themselves, it can be argued that even an Earthworm has a concept of self, but it may be vastly different than ours, who can say?

Quite elusive in reality.

Not in reality, in concept and description it's hard to grasp. In reality is simply is.

Some can argue that our identity lies within what we are, a system of limbs and organs. But then, what if we lose one of those limbs, or organs? We do not have any less of a sense of self do we? We still know what we like, what we don't like. We still have that general sense of personal identity. So where does it come from?

I would say that identity is more than the sum of our parts, yes, but without a vital organ our identity dies along with our body. The identity is a result of the person and their environment and their experiences. The environment informs the mind and determines what kind of person we are along with out body.

Logically, the next place to turn to would be the mind. Our personality, our quirks, our thoughts, our mannerisms, they all come from the brain. That must be where our identity is placed.

Yes

But then what if you encounter your clone counterpart, or a computer programmed to be exactly and completely you? Are they you? Or are you you?

First law of logical absolutes, the law of identity: A rock is a rock and not not a rock.

I am me, even a cloned copy of me does not have all of my experiences and is technically not me. It is a copy of me, but not the original. Even a duplicated set of my memories are not originals. Even if the two were indistinguishable there is obviously still a difference in the chronologcal order in which they appeared. I may not know, but just because we don't know doesn't mean that one came before the other. By definition, the original is the orignal you. No equivocation there.

The point here is the tendency to think of "identity" as a thing, rather than an abstract idea. The identity is really just a specific set of designed properties that relies on no living organism.

Incorrect, an identity is contingent upon a body, a mind is required as we have already concluded, and minds are not known to exist outside of a brain. And I would not say that an identity is a specific set of designed properties, it is a dynamic result of an individual's experiences and makeup. That is why each individual is different, no mystical reason.

However, the clone or program would still be just a simulation, wouldn't it? You would be the tangible you.

A clone is very tangible, and even genetically identical to me. No one would be able to tell the difference without some kind of outside knowledge. But again, just because we don't know that one is a clone does not mean that they are not. A clone would not be a simulation, simulations are proxies, a clone is an exact copy. Mentally they would not be the same person because they would have different experiences.

Ponder this. If you did encounter your clone, you would not be you to each other. Your first instinct would be, "Hey! That's not me, it's a clone!" The problem is, the clone would say the same exact thing. You are physiologically and psychologically the same.

Wrong, physically, not mentally

What makes you MORE you than the clone? Because you were first? How is that fair?

Becase in this universe time flows chronologically from the present to the future, so by definition a clone of me came after me and is not me.

The driving force behind this is that the notion of "identity" falls apart whenever you try to place it somewhere.

No it doesn't, identity stays intact, and if it didn't we would know because we have ways of telling when the identity is dysfunctional. The mental hospitals are full of them.

Identity itself is a paradox.

How so?

If you try to place it in the body, it unravels just as it would if you try to place it in the mind.

No it doesn't, identity is a result of the body and the sum of experiece which is contingent upon a mind which requires a body. It's an onion.

So how do we know who we are?

Because we define ourselves by our actions and experiences, the word identity is completely incidental. If we replaced the word identity with Xanadu, I still have Xanadu, and people can interact with him and recognize him. And if he acts weird people will notice, because they remember what Xanadu do.

Anyway, thanks for posting the blog, nothing like a good philosophical discussion in the morning