Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

If you wern't you, an you saw you, would you know everything about you, or wouldn't you, because you wern't you?

In advance, a general GirlAnachronism thread for random pseudo-philosophical questions might be more in order than a separate thread for each one. And there's probably even a thread alreayd where you could do that, though it might take a little searching in the forum.

Anyway, your situation there is a bit too vague to draw meaningful conclusions right now. What are we defining as "you?" The precise biological configuration of your brain and body? If so, how far removed in time is the split from 1 "you" to 2? Or by "you," do we mean the conscious expiernce of who you are, that some might term consciousness/soul/etc? Keep in mind, for most, the biological configuration and conscious awareness are one in the same and couldn't be separated from one another.

Or is a person simply "out of body" and remotely viewing their body?

Because this would be no different than 2 identical twins looking at each other. Even if they are biologically identical, their point of view, and thus brain configuration and conscious experience, is different. This might be very slight, but would inevitably exist. And the longer we go between the "schism" (twins at birth compared to twins at 30 for example) the more variation we will have.

So no, you can't experience everything about a person without being that person.

...

...the closest I could think to an exception would be if 1 of the identical people was somehow tricked into perceiving the same thing as the other person despite their different circumstances...which would require brain manipulation beyond our current understanding. Experience, after all, is subjective, and need not happen in objectively identical situations to be subjectively identical. Then, and only then, might one acheive the total knowledge that your question seems to strive for....and it exists in such a hypothetical scenario that it makes the point nearly useless.

When I meet people who are like me in a lot of ways, it takes me longer to like them, or even understand them. I don't know...maybe it's just me.

Originally posted by GirlAnachronism
If you wern't you, an you saw you, would you know everything about you, or wouldn't you, because you wern't you?

Your question (and by extension, you yourself) vexes me... is this a silly, illogical question, or is is actually very sublime and deep?
I think the former, but reserve judgment for now.
Either way, I have no idea how to answer.

If I was born a different person and I was this different person all of my life and I happen to come across someone who looked the way I looked, I would not know them, because that person is not me.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Your question (and by extension, you yourself) vexes me... is this a silly, illogical question, or is is actually very sublime and deep?
I think the former, but reserve judgment for now.

Lol, you aren't reserving judgment when you tell somebody that you think they are silly and illogical.

Originally posted by GirlAnachronism
If you wern't you, an you saw you, would you know everything about you, or wouldn't you, because you wern't you?

I would kill myself for not been me.

Originally posted by High Priest
I would kill myself for not been me.

Oh that's cute

Originally posted by GirlAnachronism
If you wern't you, an you saw you, would you know everything about you, or wouldn't you, because you wern't you?

If I saw "he who is me" but it isn't the "I" that I'am now. Then "he who is me" would be a stranger for the "I" that I'am now is in a different personality.

Gosh, my grammar teacher would kill me if she read that sentence...

if i met me in person id wanna compete with my(other)self fiercely just to see the result. Id' win 50% of the time most likely but just to see. Compete at things like at poker, chess, running, basketball, debate, car or bike race, arm wrestling, wrestling, push ups, sit ups and things like that.

i dunno..

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Your question (and by extension, you yourself) vexes me... is this a silly, illogical question, or is is actually very sublime and deep?
I think the former, but reserve judgment for now.
Either way, I have no idea how to answer.

Most sublime deep questions are just silly and illogical.

you wud be sum1 else. hence this new "you" wudnt be the "old" you, and hence you wudnt be able to see anything special in what was "supposed" to be you. its simple. both of "you" wud be different people.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
you wud be sum1 else. hence this new "you" wudnt be the "old" you, and hence you wudnt be able to see anything special in what was "supposed" to be you. its simple. both of "you" wud be different people.

And the younger one (individual A) would drive the older one (individual B) crazy because individual B knows everything that is probably going through the mind of individual A and Individual B would also know why he stopped thinking that way a long time ago and understand the foolishness of individual A.

^they might relate yes. but given that enough time{year or two} had passed, then they wud have developed differently enough to talk like old friends with same memories as opposed to the same people. and also, even the same person can have radically different phenomenology based on their mood and time and circumstances etc, so even then it wont be as freaky as some imagine.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^they might relate yes. but given that enough time{year or two} had passed, then they wud have developed differently enough to talk like old friends with same memories as opposed to the same people. and also, even the same person can have radically different phenomenology based on their mood and time and circumstances etc, so even then it wont be as freaky as some imagine.

I suppose not. It would still get kind of annoying if one of them started rambling about his latest problem...