Spica wrote:I would think that being a woman would most certainly be worse when you are being acousted by thugs. They would see you as being an easy target, someone not worthy of their fear and theirfore respect, they may even rape you. A tall, powerful looking man is much less likely to be mugged, and more likely to scare away muggers than any woman.
The statistics tell me, that men get mugged more often than women, even though they are generally less afraid of it. For whatever reason, men get beaten up and even killed on the street much more often than women - possibly it's because so many of us aren't very good at talking their way out of trouble. Women, on the other hand are more at risk in their own home, with men they already know.
Spica wrote:As for death, I myself am terrified of it. I'm a very strict materialist and I believe that there is no meaning without life. I have taken it as one of my personal goals in life to thwart death's icy grasp for as long as possible, no matter what the cost.
I largely agree with you, here. Death is certainly the worst thing that can happen to a human being, although extreme amounts of pain do cloud the judgement other way round. Still, it has been said that fearing death is the first step in surrendering to it. I do fear death, but I wish I didn't have to. Perhaps if/when it becomes clear, that I don't need to experience it, first-hand...
Spica wrote:As for identity, I think who we are is closely tied to the matter we are made of, or at least the matter that out brain is made of. If you were to die and a copy of your brain were exactly replicated, down to the last molecule (including neural connections and the memories and aspects of personality that they entail) would that brain really be you or just a copy? I am inclined to beleave that it would be a copy (granted a very good copy with the same memories and personality), and in order to really be you, the reconstructed you would have to be made of the same matter that you were origionally composed of.
But what matter are we really "originally" composed of? I don't have a single cell, a single atom, even, that I had when I was born. The particles in human body are constantly changing. Some cells don't last a week and even the longest living ones only go onfor few years. After that, the body just pushes them out. Even your brain cells are renewed in this manner. There is no unchanging "core" for a human being - both our body and our identity are in a constant state of flux. Only the general shape of both remains the same.
Still, you have some point in what you are saying. If you die now and the perfect copy is manufactured a hundred years later, you've missed a hundred years worth of flux - you're identical to the you that was a hundred years ago. As such, your identity is not perfectly continuous. However, coma patients are in a somewhat similar state and they are considered to be the same person when waking up, even if brain damage has altered their personality or caused them amnesia. Indeed, a coma patient who'd wake up ten years after loosing consiousness and with total amnesia would only have his DNA in common with the person who he was before the coma.
As such, the best way to keep your identity fully intact is to keep your consiousness continuous. While replacing your brain with nanocomputers (something I intend to do if it'll be possible in my lifetime), do it gradually - if your consiousness stays intact throughout the entire process, then there is no doubt that the product at the end of the line is still you. If your consiousness lapses or important data is lost during the transit, the matter is more difficult, but hardly impossible to deal with - remember the coma patient.