There is no "I" in "You"

[Thumpalumpacus]

If you put person A's memories and experiences in person B, then you are pretty much erasing both A and B and getting person C, because the mind, body and everything else together forms the unique individual.

Person A might disagree with that assessment.

Would A be wrong?

My physique informs my mentality. For instance, I have a debilitating bone disease in my hip that imparts chronic pain. In the thirty+ months since it's cropped up, I've grown mentally in the act of dealing with said pain; I've learnt how to cope with it, and found mental strength in making adjustments -- or not making adjustments -- in my life to cope with it.

I think the assumption that body does not affect mind is just that -- an assumption, and not borne out by experience. Thought experiments are great, I'm all for 'em -- but actual experiences trump thought experiments, for my money.

I am person A in the sense that my body has changed.

[Aoi Magi]

Yes

By what method(s) do you presume to know or question A's self-identity?

A's non-existence at the point of C's existence would be a start...

Moreover, A can choose self-identify as B even without that merger, relying solely on one's self-identity is a bit pointless.

But looking at it from another perspective, if we are to take A's view of self-identity as truth then it'd mean just the experiences or memories make an individual, but in that case none of A or B's relatives or friends would have memories or experiences of this ((A+B)/2) person and for them it'd be a person similar or quite like the person they knew but not that exact same individual.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The first cogent thing you've uttered! 

It's a start......

Hardly. I don't agree with Rhythm about everything, and when we do disagree it's a voluble one, but I would never make the mistake of dismissing the man --- he's a solid thinker whether or not we find agreement.

I think there's something in there you might want to chew upon; the ability to absorb contraventional thinking is a valuable asset to a thinker. Not that I'm an expert in that field.

[quip]

By what method(s) do you presume to know or question A's self-identity?

A's non-existence at the point of C's existence would be a start...

Bodily speaking perhaps though not mentally so. You're just reissuing the very conundrum of self.

Moreover, A can choose self-identify as B even without that merger, relying solely on one's self-identity is a bit pointless.

Sure, in either case though A doesn't have B's personality/memories/experience to draw upon. Would A not be an impostor?

But looking at it from another perspective, if we are to take A's view of self-identity as truth then it'd mean just the experiences or memories make an individual, but in that case none of A or B's relatives or friends would have memories or experiences of this ((A+B)/2) person and for them it'd be a person similar or quite like the person they knew but not that exact same individual.

---

The first cogent thing you've uttered! 

It's a start......

Hardly.  I don't agree with Rhythm about everything, and when we do disagree it's a voluble one, but I would never make the mistake of dismissing the man --- he's a solid thinker whether or not we find agreement.

I think there's something in there you might want to chew upon; the ability to absorb contraventional thinking is a valuable asset to a thinker. Not that I'm an expert in that field.  

You're correct to a point. Given his adolescent avatar and disposition it seems he's an angry young man who chooses to employ his intellect by defensively lashing out hostile invectives, all for efforts (presumably) to save the world from the devilry of religion.  

Waste of talent if you ask me. But hey, maybe someday we may meet half-way.

[Aoi Magi]

A's non-existence at the point of C's existence would be a start...

Bodily speaking perhaps though not mentally so. You're just reissuing the very conundrum of self.

What conundrum? I am simply stating what I've already stated before.

Moreover, A can choose self-identify as B even without that merger, relying solely on one's self-identity is a bit pointless.

Sure, in either case though A doesn't have B's personality/memories/experience to draw upon. Would A not be an impostor?

In order to be an imposter A has to exist. In the first case A doesn't, in the second case, yes A is pretending so can be seen as an imposter. Your point being....?

But looking at it from another perspective, if we are to take A's view of self-identity as truth then it'd mean just the experiences or memories make an individual, but in that case none of A or B's relatives or friends would have memories or experiences of this ((A+B)/2) person and for them it'd be a person similar or quite like the person they knew but not that exact same individual.

??

[Thumpalumpacus]

You're correct to a point. Given his adolescent avatar and disposition it seems he's an angry young man who chooses to employ his intellect by defensively lashing out hostile invectives, all for efforts (presumably) to save the world from the devilry of religion.  

Waste of talent if you ask me. But hey, maybe someday we may meet half-way.

Perhaps you should judge with a little more serenity in your heart? Just a thought. We each have a style of expression which may or may not be amenable, but I don't think that invalidates the points laid out.

YMMV, etc etc.

[quip]

Bodily speaking perhaps though not mentally so. You're just reissuing the very conundrum of self.

What conundrum? I am simply stating what I've already stated before.

What constitutes the self.

Sure, in either case though A doesn't have B's personality/memories/experience to draw upon. Would A not be an impostor?

In order to be an imposter A has to exist. In the first case A doesn't, in the second case, yes A is pretending so can be seen as an imposter. Your point being....?

Does the transfer of A's memories/experience to B render A non-existent?  If so, what's transferred to B?

[The Grand Nudger]

If it helps, imagine me smiling with a glass of whiskey in one hand and a joint in the other....no matter how much of a meanie-face my style might, to you, imply.  Where I come from "Hey Asshole!" is how you greet a good friend, lol.

Now, if you've got somethin against Mario, that's it...we can't be buddies.

(I doubt you'd enjoy me dropping my joking and jostling demeanor and tell you what I really think of your comments and contributions, thusfar)

[quip]

If it helps, imagine me smiling with a glass of whiskey in one hand and a joint in the other....no matter how much of a meanie-face my style might, to you, imply.  Where I come from "Hey Asshole!" is how you greet a good friend, lol.

Now, if you've got somethin against Mario, that's it...we can't be buddies.

(I doubt you'd enjoy me dropping my joking and jostling demeanor and tell you what I really think of your comments and contributions, thusfar)

Please feel free with the comic relief.

[Aoi Magi]

What conundrum? I am simply stating what I've already stated before.

What constitutes the self.

In order to be an imposter A has to exist. In the first case A doesn't, in the second case, yes A is pretending so can be seen as an imposter. Your point being....?

Does the transfer of A's memories/experience to B render A non-existent?  If so, what's transferred to B?

... umm just A's memories and experiences are transferred to B's body. You wrote that yourself, why are you asking me?

And did you not read anything I wrote so far?

'self' is the collective summation of all your memories, experiences and all of the factors creating and effecting them including physical attributes.