Would you use a teleporter if..

[Wikiy]

If teleportation is actually ever invented, it will work this way definitely, because it relies on the phenomenon of quantum teleportation.

So, let's see, if i use the teleporter, i die and an identical copy of me appears on the other end. In essence, i am the only one really affected by it because there's still a "me" in the lives of all the people i know. So in the end it comes down to whether i alone am comfortable with sacrificing my own life so that someone else who'd represent my identity can have a better life (due to the fact they can use the technology of teleportation). I'm pretty sure I'd do it.

---------- Post added 2012-12-20 at 12:28 AM ----------

It's not the physical, it's the continuous experience of being myself. That won't exist with teleportation of that kind. Teleportation that actually destroys the original isn't acceptable and I would daresay not teleportation.

Wouldn't you agree it's kind of everyone's choice? Oh, and i agree, it isn't teleportation, it's killing someone and synthesizing an identical copy on the other end. Why be afraid of calling it what it is (rhetorical)?

It's kind of the same as euthanasia, in my opinion, anyone should at any point have the right to kill themselves, given they're deemed to be psychologically stable. We could psychologically test people as well in this hypothetical situation (for prolonged periods of time if that helps) and give them a "teleporter pass", if you will.

[Kardezar]

I could only see myself doing that in extreme circumstances. We already have cars, planes and other safer more reliable means of transportation. But if it came to the point that it was common: maybe. But i wouldn't be the first.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Wouldn't you agree it's kind of everyone's choice? Oh, and i agree, it isn't teleportation, it's killing someone and synthesizing an identical copy on the other end. Why be afraid of calling it what it is (rhetorical)?

It's kind of the same as euthanasia, in my opinion, anyone should at any point have the right to kill themselves, given they're deemed to be psychologically stable. We could psychologically test people as well in this hypothetical situation (for prolonged periods of time if that helps) and give them a "teleporter pass", if you will.

It's their choice whether to utilize the technology, but not their choice as to whether they are still alive if they utilize the technology. Like, I'm not saying that people would be banned from using it, I'm saying that you can't just decide that you'd still be alive.

[Deleted]

No, because I like being alive.

[Wikiy]

It's their choice whether to utilize the technology, but not their choice as to whether they are still alive if they utilize the technology. Like, I'm not saying that people would be banned from using it, I'm saying that you can't just decide that you'd still be alive.

Well the technology is the way it is, it's going to kill you if you use it and that's simply something that those who'd want to do it would have to cope with. That's the point, those that would see enough good coming out of it to counter the fact they're going to be killed get to use it if they want to.

[MrWolly]

Dying without logical reasoning doesn't sound favorable.

[Seegtease]

This really depends on the much larger topic of human consciousness and the soul.

Would the new body have the same "soul" (if you subscribe to such a thing)? Would our consciousness be transferred, or would a whole new consciousness be made? Self-awareness is a tricky thing.

[mvaliz]

Ok, I remember years ago I saw a short cartoon sketch about someone inventing a teleportation machine. He stepped though one end and appeared in a tube the other other side of the room. After his friend looked at how the machine worked, he discovered the machine would clone the person using the device which formed the information in the other tube, including all there memories, and then destroy the original in the first tube.

Anyway, if you could use a machine that could teleport you anywhere, but ultimately would destroy you and have a clone of you in its place, would you use it?

I saw that very same cartoon - it was on "O'Canada" on Cartoon Network here in America, a show dedicated to showing obscure Canadian animation projects.

And it was that VERY same cartoon that made me absolutely question the idea of ever using a teleport! :P

Especially the part in the animation where they told him to turn off the one end that destroys the original. Both stepped out and started arguing... then they had to send ONE of them back in to disintegrate themselves.

To me, that was the big part. I only see out of these two eyes... I'm not sure what a soul is, but if a clone came out - I KNOW that the conciousness that looks through my current eyes would not be looking through that clone's of eyes, or thinking his thoughts.

So, my answer is absolutely not. To me - a teleporter like that is a death sentence.

The only... ONLY way I will now use a teleporter is if it actually somehow keeps my body in-tact through the whole process... weither that be via some mini wormhole or other means...

---------- Post added 2012-12-20 at 05:26 AM ----------

If teleportation is actually ever invented, it will work this way definitely, because it relies on the phenomenon of quantum teleportation.

So, let's see, if i use the teleporter, i die and an identical copy of me appears on the other end. In essence, i am the only one really affected by it because there's still a "me" in the lives of all the people i know. So in the end it comes down to whether i alone am comfortable with sacrificing my own life so that someone else who'd represent my identity can have a better life (due to the fact they can use the technology of teleportation). I'm pretty sure I'd do it.

What exactly would be the 'better life' for your other self via going through a teleporter? Chances are all you're doing is shaving off, at best, a couple hours journey from your current life.... I personally don't think that using a "convenience" device for saving hours of journeying is worth an eternity of oblivion. Trust me, I want to visit Japan as much as the next person - but I do NOT want to sacrifice my life so that some other identity can go experience it 12 hours earlier than me. >_<

Food and other materials? Sure! Send those through no problem! Just do NOT send me through it! :P

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Well the technology is the way it is, it's going to kill you if you use it and that's simply something that those who'd want to do it would have to cope with. That's the point, those that would see enough good coming out of it to counter the fact they're going to be killed get to use it if they want to.

It seemed like the point of the question was to see what people thought about whether it was dying, etc.

What exactly would be the 'better life' for your other self via going through a teleporter? Chances are all you're doing is shaving off, at best, a couple hours journey from your current life.... I personally don't think that using a "convenience" device for saving hours of journeying is worth an eternity of oblivion. Trust me, I want to visit Japan as much as the next person - but I do NOT want to sacrifice my life so that some other identity can go experience it 12 hours earlier than me. >_<

Food and other materials? Sure! Send those through no problem! Just do NOT send me through it! :P

Well, the only things worth sending through a transporter like that would be things that have emergent properties, like human beings. Other things would cost more resources than they were worth

[Powerogue]

This skips over the fact I'd die.

Sure "I" would be alive. For me me, that sounds pretty horrific, being atomized and all.

Though with technology like that, I would volunteer for some sort of host body with my brain uploaded for when I die. Huzzah, immortality!

[PACOX]

I wouldn't use it. Our current understanding of science points to "you" dying and the thing coming out of the teleporter is another person with your memories. Think about it. The atoms that make up your body existed before you were alive and will exist well after but you have no memory of them before you were alive. Following that example, if they were to separate you would cease to exist.

[Verain]

The problem is that a clone with all your memories is still not you.

Are you the same you that went to bed last night?


Seems like the same question.


The "Think like a dinosaur" short story (it even got made into one of the Outer Limits episodes) is pretty much about this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Like_a_Dinosaur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_L..._Outer_Limits)

[skrump]

The problem is that a clone with all your memories is still not you.

Of course if I remember correctly the trek teleporters were able to build the clone free of genetic defects and without the parasites living on the original host.

Such technology would be most beneficial, especially if you could shut off the feature destroying the original copy "let the organ harvesting begin"

[zerocoolhack]

If my consciousness is copied then yes it IS me.

Again you imply that there is some soul or spark in a human being that is not derived through arranging of biomatter. It's probably a fundamental difference in beliefs that lets a discussion such as this be so fruitless and dry.

My belief: There is no spark. There is no soul. We are the mere sum of DNA + physical experiences in life (meaning training, scars etc) + memories. If all three things are 100% copied into a clone and the template destroyed in the process, the clone IS ME.

The only point in time where a clone ceases to be "me" is when we both meet and learn of our existence. Why? Because memories of both individuals are different.

I dont believe in souls or sparks. Science has no idea how we store and access our memories and collective experiences; they don't really know what makes us us.
Think for a second that they could clone you perfectly. Now if the clone flies halfway across the world and you stay where you are would you experience what the clone is experiencing? The answer as far as we know would be no which would mean you are 2 different people with 2 separate Consciouses.

[Wikiy]

What exactly would be the 'better life' for your other self via going through a teleporter? Chances are all you're doing is shaving off, at best, a couple hours journey from your current life.... I personally don't think that using a "convenience" device for saving hours of journeying is worth an eternity of oblivion. Trust me, I want to visit Japan as much as the next person - but I do NOT want to sacrifice my life so that some other identity can go experience it 12 hours earlier than me. >_<

There's really no way i can explain it. I just know i wouldn't mind dying for it.