The Ship Of Theseus Paradox

[HououinKiyoma]

Hey guys! I was watching a YouTube video on paradox's and this one caught my imagination. What are your opinions on the Ship Of Theseus Paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus)?

[phuckphace]

I think it's an excellent illustration of why the West is doomed if the ongoing population replacement scheme isn't held back.

in precisely the same way that a ship which has had all of its planks replaced is not the same ship, also holds for nations too. you can still call it "Theseus' ship", or "Germany", but if the original "planks" are swapped out for Turks and other non-Germans it's not really Germany anymore, just a display model.

awesome new name for multiculturalism: the Ship of Theseus Experiment. I'm gonna start using this.

[Judean Zealot]

The ship is definitely A Ship of Theseus, in the sense that it partakes of the same Formal Cause. (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-causality/#FouCau)

The question which remains for me is that even within Aristotelian teleology, just because a ship is a ship of Theseus (i.e. a sort of ship purported to verify the myth of the Minotaur, to assert Athenian pride, and to make the religious pilgrimage to Minoa for the sacrifices), that still doesn't make it the ship of Theseus, as in the same ship that has been used previously.

To summarise: While the ship is definitely 'A ship of Theseus', I seriously doubt that we can say that it is 'The ship of Theseus'.

[sqishy]

I see it as being the same ship, but by the interactions going on between the components, because (from my thread on walls) more complex entities result from certain interactions from other certain entities. The ship is such from the exherent nature of the components.

I argue that different entities can share similar interactions, so that is what is mostly important here.

One could also say that it's not the same ship, because it's essentially both the presence of the components that make the ship, not essentially the interaction between them - the ship is such from the inherent nature of the components. For me though, it's at least both interaction and component that matter for me.

I find it better that 'being' is seen through 'doing', rather than positing some pure things-in-themselves that are also relevant in how they appear to us.



To summarise: While the ship is definitely 'A ship of Theseus', I seriously doubt that we can say that it is 'The ship of Theseus'.

I agree; I feel that people are tilted one way or the other here because how how much importance they put on proper names for objects, over just common names.

[HououinKiyoma]

I was interested in 2 scenarios mainly

1. A person(lets name him X) is (hypothetically) cloned, and somehow the clone has all the memories of X. So are both of them X?

2. If X had all his organs and brain replaced with another set of organs which are grown from his own DNA and his memories are uploaded onto the new brain, is this the same person X?

I'd like to know what you guys think!

[Cadanance00]

So is there a practical relevance to that?

The real paradox is where do real paradoxes end and mental masturbation begins.

[HououinKiyoma]

So is there a practical relevance to that?

The real paradox is where do real paradoxes end and mental masturbation begins.

I explicitly mentioned "Hypothetical".

[Microcosm]

It seems to be more of a construct of similarity than the original object, the object in question being similar to the original, but not the original. The term original suggests the ship as it was when it was in use and whatnot. So, if the ship is not close enough to what it once was, we could hardly call it original.

How close it has to be in order to be considered original is up to speculation, I suppose.

[Flapjack]

I just watched a 30 second youtube video on the topic:') As identity is made up it is difficult to define as there is no set parameters. I would say building an identical ship is not the same ship but replacing every part of the ship over the time will be the same ship. At least to me anyway.

I don't see the point of debating vague social constructs like this.

[dxcxdzv]

I was interested in 2 scenarios mainly

1. A person(lets name him X) is (hypothetically) cloned, and somehow the clone has all the memories of X. So are both of them X?

2. If X had all his organs and brain replaced with another set of organs which are grown from his own DNA and his memories are uploaded onto the new brain, is this the same person X?

I'd like to know what you guys think!
You know, even you are constituted of cells that are just sort of clones of the cells you were constituted of 10 years ago. More or less.

[sqishy]

You know, even you are constituted of cells that are just sort of clones of the cells you were constituted of 10 years ago. More or less.

People sure seem to hold onto themselves still being themselves, in this sense!

[Flapjack]

You know, even you are constituted of cells that are just sort of clones of the cells you were constituted of 10 years ago. More or less.
Noooo there is a lot of genetic diversity in meiosis the double-chromatid homologous pairs of chromosomes cross over with each othe. This allows genes from each parent to mix. There is also the random chromatid assortment and the reduction from diplod to haploid. That and of course the fertilization and mutations

[dxcxdzv]

Noooo there is a lot of genetic diversity in meiosis the double-chromatid homologous pairs of chromosomes cross over with each othe. This allows genes from each parent to mix. There is also the random chromatid assortment and the reduction from diplod to haploid. That and of course the fertilization and mutations
I wasn't referring to gametes and the - wonderful - process of mammals' reproduction.

[Flapjack]

I wasn't referring to gametes and the - wonderful - process of mammals' reproduction.
I misreadXD much of our body is the exact same as it was 10 years ago though, the 7 year regen idea is a myth!

[Judean Zealot]

You know, even you are constituted of cells that are just sort of clones of the cells you were constituted of 10 years ago. More or less.

Although, of course, your cells organically produce the new ones, so it is essentially a continuum; whereas the Ship of Theseus is reconstituted of entirely new boards.

[Flapjack]

Although, of course, your cells organically produce the new ones, so it is essentially a continuum; whereas the Ship of Theseus is reconstituted of entirely new boards.
Yeah and some of the daughter cell would have parts of the original cell but I think her example fits.