Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Yes it is true, very much so. You took one part of the argument and reflected it.
So how about the other part of that comment.
Do you believe you would still be you without your brain?
The real flip side of your question is: do you think you'd still be you as a "brain in a vat" without any body?
Ultimately this whole discussion boils down to challenging the definition of "you" or "I". Biologically every "singular" person is the result of many living things working together, so the concept of "I" is an illusion. Physically, there is no "I", but only "us".
This makes the discussion easier. If the hand is removed, then of course "we" are different because "we" lost a piece of "us". This would also be true if "our" brain was removed.
Nevertheless, there have been cases of brain dead people's body adapting to the lack of central nervous system, so the body is more independently alive than we tend to give it credit.
Oh please. Nice words and all, but if you fall into a ditch, you don't say "well, shit, we're fucked!" like Gollum. You feel like a single entity in trouble. You don't say "my dear neurons, gut bacteria and anus cells, let's work together to get out of this mess!!"
You truly believe the semantics of the English language disproves the point? English and the way it defines "I" is greatly affected by things seperate from biological definitions (one being the spiritual concept of the "soul")
Also, there did exist languages in other cultures that did not have the same concept of "I" as the English language. Your counter-argument is very weak.
I used an example in English because we're discussing in English, not because of semantics or language rules. My counterargument is fine.
But you made me wonder, is there a human language on Earth in which an individual refers to themselves as "we" instead of "I" - or yo, je, ich, watashi, etc? That would be fascinating.
Or what are those other languages that have a different way of using "I", which I'm assuming you're referring to as the pronoun to refer to oneself?