Mando season 3

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I mean I do not find it a freshman philosophy question, because that is how one charactarizes a question of seemingly great but really little consequence with no clear answer. I have a clear answer. My answer is resoundingly that the only way I can interpret them is as disintegrating a person and creating a clone with their memories at another location, and no amount of techno-babble will convince me otherwise or quell my revulsion to the implications of that when the heroes of the franchise are constantly using the things. I actually find it much easier to accept that every Star Wars droid we've met who seemed like a person simply appeared that way due to faulty or eccentric programming than I find it to accept that transporters aren't murdering and duplicating people, because that's clearly what they do.

I get you, but how is that functionally different from the fact that you die when you go to sleep and another creature, using your memories, wakes up in the morning and pretends to be you?

 

[Ryujin]

Droids as Persons: Stockholm Syndrome in the bar. Restraining Bolts to 'shackle' recalcitrant droids. Wipe and reprogramme, read as brainwashing, as an ultimate solution for disobedience.

 

[trappedslider]

Did one of you guys read or write this? Star Wars Supports Slavery And It Needs To Be Stopped

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I get you, but how is that functionally different from the fact that you die when you go to sleep and another creature, using your memories, wakes up in the morning and pretends to be you?

Because one only involves ceasing to exist in an arbitrary rhetorical construct of what sleep is, whereas the other involves disintegration and artificial duplication.

If one accepts every piece of Star Trek official techno-babble I'm sure it comes out as equivalent, but it's pretty obvious that there is no way they could remotely realistically have the technological capabilities to disassemble someone at one location and reassemble them at another, and have other capabilities to replicate organic matter, without having the capability to just as easily make copies of people. And once you can copy people, in the absence of some sort of soul concept (which Star Trek is highly allergic to), continuity of physical existence becomes the remaining measure by which a person can be defined as an individual rather than a copy of said individual.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Did one of you guys read or write this? Star Wars Supports Slavery And It Needs To Be Stopped

I mean clearly I didn't, because my stance is that it supports slavery, and this needs to be ignored because there is no satisfying resolution trying to tackle that issue and we should just enjoy our space opera.

 

[Ryujin]

Did one of you guys read or write this? Star Wars Supports Slavery And It Needs To Be Stopped

"Not I", said the dog.

 

[Hussar]

Ah the joys of watching genre fans try to work out how to enjoy genre fiction.

 

[MarkB]

Did one of you guys read or write this? Star Wars Supports Slavery And It Needs To Be Stopped

No, I came to my conclusions decades ago, of my own accord. It doesn't spoil my enjoyment of the franchise, but it does affect it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Because one only involves ceasing to exist in an arbitrary rhetorical construct of what sleep is

Only because we've agreed, as a society, that we're the same person when we wake up and go to sleep.

The Star Trek civilizations that we've met have agreed to the same thing.

But from a functional standpoint, it's the same argument.

 

[Ryujin]

Only because we've agreed, as a society, that we're the same person when we wake up and go to sleep.

The Star Trek civilizations that we've met have agreed to the same thing.

But from a functional standpoint, it's the same argument.

It ventures into the mental "light in the refrigerator" territory. Does the world cease to exist because I'm not conscious to experience it? Whoa, dude. My hands are HUGE. They can touch everything, except themselves. Oh, wait...