Philosophical zombies

[robvalue]

---

If you have a zombie and a non-zombie in front of you, how do you tell which is which? To know that "corruption" has gone on, you'd have to know how a person is supposed to be acting before the corruption.

I would look at the results of their logic. The question for me is "in which context" should I judge that the result is complete or not?
Is death the end, or is the continues advent of generations is the context; i.e a never ending context?

Are we living a result inflicted by the past generations? That means that the conditions are not so alien to the results.
But to answer you; a zombie is that person producing the wrong results. I need to observe the results of their actions first, then decide.

Can you give any examples here of what two people do/say under your supervision, and how you come to your conclusion? I have no idea what you mean by "wrong results". People get things wrong all the time, and are illogical all the time. What do you mean, "is death the end"? Are you saying you'd ask people that question? Am I a zombie because I think it is indeed the end?

Let's say my physical body is replicated exactly. The resultant brain has all my knowledge and works exactly the same as my brain. It's not an imposter as such, it is just me, minus whatever "consciousness" is supposed to be. It will produce the same results as me under examination, unless you can somehow find a way to measure "how conscious" each one is. How do you tell the difference?

My answer is that this doesn't make sense. If it's a copy of me, it's as conscious as I am. Consciousness is a direct result of my physical brain: that is what all evidence points to. Otherwise, my consciousness/essence is some other entity, which exists on some other plane which we can't ever access. But if we can't access it, how can we conclude it exists at all?

For all I know, everyone else could be zombies, or some of them, or none of them. I can't think of any way I can tell the difference.