h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Holy Socks - A Philosophical Dichotomy - A899643
Author: Dr Montague Trout - U188966

Darning Needle, anyone?

Blimey We're getting into some very deep philosphical waters here Dr T.

Part of this entry reminds me of a bit of shpeel I once heard spoken by a bloke who juggled... let's see, I think it was an axe, a meat cleaver... and some other equally dangerous sharp-edged object. At one point he said "This is the axe Washington used to chop down the cherry tree. I've had to replace the blade... and the handle. It occupies the same space though."

Is it the same axe? It occupies the same co-ordinates in time and space as the original even though it contains none of the original parts.

And what about an old master which has been allowed to decay almost to the point of destruction, and then restored. Can it still be called an authentic Rembrandt/Titian/Canaletto?

It's a fact too that the cells in our bodies are constantly dying and being replaced (except, interestingly, nerve cells). Am I still the same Gosho I was 10 years ago? I look the same.

"...and a dead person has no identity." Substitute 'person' for 'beloved pet which has died and been stuffed', or 'deranged Californian millionaire whose relatives believe that cryogenics will allow him to live again in the future', and you might have an argument on your hands!

As far as I am led to understand, Gosho, every cell in your body (or mine) changes every seven years. However, I think that cells pass on a kind of 'cell memory' which perpetuate what was there before.

DMT, I think that the bit about the brain being the source of the identity is now looking a bit ragged, given the work currently being carried out, eg by Dr Candace Pert, which suggests that our bodies carry memories in the cells of all the experiences that have happened to us. She has done work with peptides and T-cells and calls them the 'molecules of emotion'.

I am told that the subtle bodies are whole even if our physical bodies are missing a limb or two.

Would it be helpful if I found a link to this work?

Obviously the answer here is for you to replace your socks more regularly.

There is a fundamental difference here between a label - eg My sock. and an identity viz the ego. The label effectively makes no difference to the object being referred, and the ammount of the original object remaining makes it a purely hypothetical question about at what point it is no longer the original item. When 51% is replaced or when 100% or merely 10% how much of my car is the car I bought ? It matters not because it is labelled and identified as my car - it remains my car because I continue to express ownership of it, like your hammer it is no longer THE hammer, but it is your hammer.

Ego is a more delicate matter and I personally would argue that the soul is whwt defines our identity, not the body parts, memory or any other physical attribute.

Couple of typos - the word 'is' is repeated in the first line and the title - upon which I won't try to sway you - should be Holey Socks.

How come nobody has leapt in and said this shouldn't be in peer review ?

I think these sort of examples are really pointing to the conclusion that there are only labels, no real 'identities' - at least if assume no sort of supernatural souls etc. (that's a whole other discussion)

If identity is not from the physical constituents but at best from their physical arrangement (as the gradual replacement example indicates), and even that arrangement is changing all the time, then in what sense is there a fundamental identity for me? Perhaps the arrangement of molecules in (near?) this body at this particular instant of time gives some sort of identity for (me, now) but that's not really any good, it's never repeated.

So the best I think we can do is have subjective, human-given labels for things, including socks and people. The universe doesn't know socks and people exist, it only appears to recognise fundamental particles.

All this is very reductionist of course, but what else is there really?

There are some cool teleportation type thought experiments which also point to issues about identity, might fit in here.

A couple of links on Dr Candace Pert for you, DMT.

http://www.suchnessspa.com/Articles/candace_pert.htm

http://opioids.com/endogenous/candace-pert.html

If I am to expand this into EG material, please let me know into what branch of philosophy I have drifted.

Thanks.

McKay - I fear my socks fall into the same 'sundries' drawer as my A898752s

The Dr Candace Pert stuff, or other people's stuff?

Dr Pert is a research scientist (should have got the Nobel Prize and was done out of it as she was a woman).

DMT, hi.

This is a great start. You can definitely expand it a bit more. Let's see...

I love the tin-man example! There's a Wizard of Oz entry somewhere in the EG that would be worth a link.

This is a question I've thought about before, and I really like that you've brought in the issue of enhanced individualtiy, which I hadn't thought of before. Just to poke at that, consider a dozen similar hand-made items, all unique, whose worn out parts are gradually replaced with mass-produced pieces until all 12 are identical.

You might get some ideas from A525728, which I wrote over 18 months ago, since which time I've replaced whatever cells would have caused me to particularly identify with it. All the same, you might find it interesting. I think I came to the conclusion that process is more fundamental than existence-qua-entity.

"please let me know into what branch of philosophy I have drifted"

Ontology, I suspect. Speaking of which, I would highly recommend googling for "Ontological anarchy" and reading everything you can find by the guy who invented that concept! (That recommendation is for anyone, BTW, and might not have anything to do with this entry.)

I feel like I should be able to name philosophers who've considered the question you're addressing, and I'm disappointed that all I can think of is Descartes, who considers the existence of a blob of wax in the first or second of his Meditations. He ends up drifting into Theology, which is never a good idea, but there might be a quoteable bit from where he's still talking about the wax.

It's hard to imagine that Aristotle didn't talk about it, but I've replaced *all* my cells since reading him.



GTB

I read the first part of your entry under construction, GTB (note I've not yet read it to the end, as I'm rushing here) and immediately thought of Jean-Paul Satres. Might not be applicable, as I haven't read it to the end as I say.

(Off topic note - I should be preparing for a Quaker Christmas party that I'm producing a children's playlet for.)

It's not really under construction. More like, abandoned a long time ago. But I should read some Sartre (as should we all, I'm sure).

I read him a very long time ago as part of my degree, although I've forgotten most of it. Hmm, thinking of existentialism, I realise that it would be good for me to remind myself what he was all about too.

Something about soi-meme and a couple of other terms I've obviously forgotten.

Oh well.

Most of the links are in French and German, which I could cope with given a bit more time.

Here's one in English.

http://www.goldenessays.com/alphabetic/3/philosophy/sartres-existentialism1.htm

"Soi-meme" - that wouldn't be "the thing in itself", would it? I'm actaully a Hume fan, when you get right down to it. Metaphysics gives me the shakes.

Oh, can't resist it, here's another interesting one.

http://my.execpc.com/~ferguson/sartre.html

if it's a bit off-topic.

The amazing thing for me is to find out that he was still alive when I was studying him. That never occured to me at the time!

That link has a nice summary of existentialist ethics, but it doesn't really address ontology, which presumably forms the grounds for those ethics.

I was referring to the first link you posted, just then.

Second link - totally irrelevant, but WOW! Great stuff!

Yes! How could I forget all this stuff!

OK, diversion over, I'll try to stick to comments on the entry from now on.