[amalcon]

This kind of idea tends to lead to debates on what the self even is: what is "my" consciousness? How would even a hypothetical omniscient determine that my consciousness had been "born" somewhere (and/or somewhen) else? It's a ship of theseus problem: what is the attribute that makes the consciousness "mine"?

This is not to say you're wrong (by any means!). It's just to say that we'd need to have a really long discussion before getting to the part where we discuss plausibility. I actually find the concept of reincarnation fascinating -- especially temporally nonlinear versions, where e.g. a past life might happen in a future year. One's consciousness might read about historical events that it will "later" participate in. Could lead to some interesting fiction if nothing else.

It unfortunately seems to take a while to get to the part that's interesting.

[IanKerr]

I've tried to grapple with questions like this by imagining having woken up with total amnesia. Without any memories or understanding of who I am, or what I've done, I would have absolutely no connection to the person I am today, I would be a stranger to myself. Yet, there's still a sense in which "my" consciousness has persisted, in theory, as "I" would still be seeing through my own eyes.

I'm not sure how to fully reconcile this except to give up and say that full amnesia is as good as having died and "someone else" is now inhabiting my body, but that doesn't seem quite right.

Continuity of experience is part of what seems to make "my" consciousness mine.

[tshaddox]

Another clearly relevant thought experiment is if your entire consciousness could be duplicated. For a fascinating (and horrifying) take on this: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

[pksebben]

thanks for sharing, this was great.

I even tried to click on the "further reading" links at the bottom

[candiddevmike]

You assume that YOU were the one who lived yesterday, when it could very well be some other consciousness that ended when you fell asleep and you're rev $(days_since_birth).

[pixl97]

I have a feeling that any moment p-zombies are going brought into this conversation.

Doh, I brought p-zombies into this conversation.

[pksebben]

had to look it up. it's kind of interesting. like someone took solipsism and turned it inside out.

[pksebben]

Isn't there continuity there? you're in the same body, which has to have some bearing on a consciousness.

for example, my knees are shot. part of being me is having to put up with that, which causes a sort of pattern in my experience. were I to get amnesia, those patterns would persist.

[kweingar]

I strongly encourage you to read the later chapters of Derek Parfit's Reasons and Persons. It is entirely dedicated to the question of personal identity, or more accurately, what "matters" when it comes to personal identity.

He doesn't really address the question of reincarnation specifically, but I think you would still find it interesting. He challenges typical notions of personhood ("What makes me different from you is the physical continuity of my body over time") by pointing out that this is only a technological limitation. We could imagine a world with teleportation or brain transplants where this wouldn't necessarily be true.

[drdec]

You don't even need to get to the point where your consciousness is inhabiting other people to get into this. Today's you is different from yesterday's you and tomorrow's you - you all have different experiences and memories. The you of this moment only exists in this moment and is already gone.

[komali2]

I am definitely not as well read as I like here but I do think about this subject a lot and in particular I've been chewing on Time.

Lately I was thinking, why don't I feel more anger right now at past me or future me? Like you say, those could be seen as different people than me.

Past me made present me fat. Future me implicitly prevents me from enjoying this cake by pressuring me to do things that won't result with him also being fat.

When I start work in the morning, I've been assigned a task according to the goals of past me. Why should I care what that guy wanted? I want to play Elden Ring. Ah but there's future me again, mad that he can't play Elden Ring because he had to rush to finish work I was supposed to do. Well fuck that guy, I might die of an aneurysm before his time, then none of us get to play videogames!

But I don't really feel mad at past or future me because I recognize them as me and our goals are mostly consistently aligned. I'm thinking that my identity and Mind is very deeply rooted in the Time dimension, though not clear on all the implications there. I do at least feel that memory is a critical part of Mind. The continuation of my memory timeline seems most likely to be what Me is.

[pksebben]

I have fairly strong opinions for both of those other mes. Keeps us all aligned, really.

'Mad' would be a misnomer, though. mad seems counterproductive.

[hilariouswhip]

This only says that consciousness is ever-mutating. Most would agree on that. But most would disagree on the death question: afterlife, another life, or annihilation.

[sshine]

More precisely, it says that one's notion of individual self is ever-mutating.

The self is only part of consciousness.

[amalcon]

Indeed! This is another one of the fascinating paths to which this idea may lead.

[hilariouswhip]

I didn’t mention the self or omniscience.