Being an organism simplifies the problem, doesn’t it? We all have the experience of having parts replaced: some daily and some over longer periods, but every part is replaced over time. The continuation of consciousness unites the different parts.
It’s a real question for artifacts. But maybe the artifacts were never a “real thing” to begin with, certainly not in the same sense that an organism is.
"We all have the experience of having parts replaced: some daily..." Being the resident body-part replacement expert (both hips, both knees, both shoulder and looking at the right foot now), I sat here and wracked my brain trying to figure out what part of our body we replace daily. Gotta admit, I'm stumped - BUT! There's a body part for that. 0>;~}
More seriously, back in the day it was not uncommon for steam locomotives to be extensively rebuilt, adding modern (for the time) appliances and even converting them to a different arrangement of driving and ancillary wheels. This causes at least some debate on exactly what constitutes a 'restoration' of a particular locomotive. The one our museum is working on, for instance, is going to get a mostly welded rather than riveted boiler due to issues with the original riveting resulting in weakening of the steel at the boiler course joints to the point reinstalling rivets is impossible. Cosmetically nothing with change since the welds will be hidden by the boiler insulation and jacketing but it's still not purely 'authentic' to the 1905 construction, or even later rebuilds.
If the real question in the original version is about what is important about a thing in terms of the memories we attach to it (I think that's what it's really about- no one cares if a thing is the original or not if they get it later and have no knowledge of it's past or original form), then I suppose for a living thing it's not even comparable. The thing has it's own memories to define itself. I found this amusing, and didn't bother to actually think about it that much, it was just something fun. You're right though. Maybe it clarifies things in an interesting way though.
8 comments:
Someone made a speculative video about what Medieval war machines would have been like on the Island of Sodor.
Being an organism simplifies the problem, doesn’t it? We all have the experience of having parts replaced: some daily and some over longer periods, but every part is replaced over time. The continuation of consciousness unites the different parts.
It’s a real question for artifacts. But maybe the artifacts were never a “real thing” to begin with, certainly not in the same sense that an organism is.
Like the man who has the same axe his grandfather did. The handle has only been replaced 5 times, and the head 3
"We all have the experience of having parts replaced: some daily..."
Being the resident body-part replacement expert (both hips, both knees, both shoulder and looking at the right foot now), I sat here and wracked my brain trying to figure out what part of our body we replace daily. Gotta admit, I'm stumped - BUT! There's a body part for that. 0>;~}
In a slightly different direction, the question applies to a range of plastic surgery outcomes.
Eric Hines
Blood Neutrophils are replaced as often as daily, I believe.
More seriously, back in the day it was not uncommon for steam locomotives to be extensively rebuilt, adding modern (for the time) appliances and even converting them to a different arrangement of driving and ancillary wheels. This causes at least some debate on exactly what constitutes a 'restoration' of a particular locomotive. The one our museum is working on, for instance, is going to get a mostly welded rather than riveted boiler due to issues with the original riveting resulting in weakening of the steel at the boiler course joints to the point reinstalling rivets is impossible. Cosmetically nothing with change since the welds will be hidden by the boiler insulation and jacketing but it's still not purely 'authentic' to the 1905 construction, or even later rebuilds.
If the real question in the original version is about what is important about a thing in terms of the memories we attach to it (I think that's what it's really about- no one cares if a thing is the original or not if they get it later and have no knowledge of it's past or original form), then I suppose for a living thing it's not even comparable. The thing has it's own memories to define itself. I found this amusing, and didn't bother to actually think about it that much, it was just something fun. You're right though. Maybe it clarifies things in an interesting way though.
Post a Comment