Question for non-zombies: If you went to sleep as me in my bed with my memories...

[AverageBozo]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

The reality that the I that is you knows is different than the one that the I that is me knows, but with only one awareness (a partial one at that) operational at a time there would be no way to notice that reality had changed from one to the other.

If I am understanding correctly, you are saying that you believe that there would be a difference but it would be imperceptible, meaning something would have actually changed but it would impossible to be noticed or observed; is that correct?

Yes, that is exactly what I meant.

However I would like to clarify that a difference exists that could be observed, but neither of the I’s would be aware of that difference nor even be able to be aware of a difference, because they each have only one reality and therefore cannot make a comparison.

[Sculptor1]

Of course, we have things like "Joe in Frank's body" in fantasy fiction, by the way, and that's fun for what it is--very loose fantasizing, but we have to just pretend that that could work somehow, without fussing over the details, because in reality the idea is incoherent.

PG Wodehouse did this with Laughing Gas. One can think of other uses of this fiction such as the Netflix series Travellers; Tom Hanks in Big; who knows how many more?
My problem with this obvious non event is that without know the HOW of the situation you cannot answer the question.
It's not just a detail.
Because we know it is nonsense, any question is valid.

Q: If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

My answers:
1) Of course it would make no difference. Since I wake up in my body (WETF that means), I would not be able to retain anything from the experience.
2) It would make a massive difference. My life would be shattered and I would spend the rest of my life in psychiatric care, dribbling into a cup confused at the experience.
3) With the knowlege of sharing another man's body I would be so disgusted I'd have to commit suicide.
4) Nothing would be noticed, except for a weird tendancy; I'd have an excessive complusive desire to miderate posts with diabling pedanticism.
5) Add x, shake, and flush...
6) Eh?
7) Get an unquenchable desire to watch The Walking Dead from Season 1 to Season 9, and then watch them all backwards..

[mystery]

We would not notice or be aware of a difference, although a difference would exist. The senses that we have will not provide us the information about the difference. That information would come from a sense that we do not have, of an unknown type.

In the same, we often will have intuition or gut feeling about something, but no measurable facts. This occurs when our senses detect something that does not fit into the acceptable frequency to be measured by us.

Would you notice a difference: I don't know because gut feeling or intuition might catch it.
Would there be a difference to notice: Yes, but do you notice it is the issue.

[The Beast]

I heard this happened to someone standing in a swamp. The man disintegrated due to lighting but somehow there was an unknown energy forming everything back even the memories. Man vs the ‘swampman’.

[AmericanKestrel]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

What kind of difference, where?
There will be no difference in your spirit/atma/conciousness. There is only one consciousness, but bodies and minds carry memories. Those belong to your body not your spirit.

[Atla]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

What kind of difference, where?
There will be no difference in your spirit/atma/conciousness. There is only one consciousness, but bodies and minds carry memories. Those belong to your body not your spirit.

It's not so simple, the "one consciousness", is featureless, empty. While self-awareness also belongs to the body.

[AmericanKestrel]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

What kind of difference, where?
There will be no difference in your spirit/atma/conciousness. There is only one consciousness, but bodies and minds carry memories. Those belong to your body not your spirit.

It's not so simple, the "one consciousness", is featureless, empty. While self-awareness also belongs to the body.

Self-awareness/atma/spirit is the same as the One Conciousness that is conditioned by body-mind and pervades within all names and forms. When body-mind is gone, self-awareness remains. Individual minds gather thoughts and memories. The atma/spirit remains pure, and is the only Seer, always the subject.

[Atla]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

What kind of difference, where?
There will be no difference in your spirit/atma/conciousness. There is only one consciousness, but bodies and minds carry memories. Those belong to your body not your spirit.

It's not so simple, the "one consciousness", is featureless, empty. While self-awareness also belongs to the body.

Self-awareness/atma/spirit is the same as the One Conciousness that is conditioned by body-mind and pervades within all names and forms. When body-mind is gone, self-awareness remains. Individual minds gather thoughts and memories. The atma/spirit remains pure, and is the only Seer, always the subject.

As I said it's not so simple, Hindus have been fooling for themselves for eons. Yes it's true that there is only one "Seer", the eternal witness. But this "Seer" is empty, it's simply the world itself, existence itself. It's everything at the same time, while not being anything in particular.

The particular self-awarenesses belongs to human bodies. The feelings, sensations of these self-awarenesses belong to human bodies. Several Eastern philosophies have come up with a subtle form of narcissism, where they think that the sensation of their own self-awareness is how the "One consciousness" feels, but the truth is that the "One consciousness" doesn't feel like anything.

[AmericanKestrel]

What kind of difference, where?
There will be no difference in your spirit/atma/conciousness. There is only one consciousness, but bodies and minds carry memories. Those belong to your body not your spirit.

It's not so simple, the "one consciousness", is featureless, empty. While self-awareness also belongs to the body.

Self-awareness/atma/spirit is the same as the One Conciousness that is conditioned by body-mind and pervades within all names and forms. When body-mind is gone, self-awareness remains. Individual minds gather thoughts and memories. The atma/spirit remains pure, and is the only Seer, always the subject.

As I said it's not so simple, Hindus have been fooling for themselves for eons. Yes it's true that there is only one "Seer", the eternal witness. But this "Seer" is empty, it's simply the world itself, existence itself. It's everything at the same time, while not being anything in particular.

The particular self-awarenesses belongs to human bodies. The feelings, sensations of these self-awarenesses belong to human bodies. Several Eastern philosophies have come up with a subtle form of narcissism, where they think that the sensation of their own self-awareness is how the "One consciousness" feels, but the truth is that the "One consciousness" doesn't feel like anything.

Hmmm. Can you quote the source of your statements? Or are they our own observations?

[Atla]

It's not so simple, the "one consciousness", is featureless, empty. While self-awareness also belongs to the body.

Self-awareness/atma/spirit is the same as the One Conciousness that is conditioned by body-mind and pervades within all names and forms. When body-mind is gone, self-awareness remains. Individual minds gather thoughts and memories. The atma/spirit remains pure, and is the only Seer, always the subject.

As I said it's not so simple, Hindus have been fooling for themselves for eons. Yes it's true that there is only one "Seer", the eternal witness. But this "Seer" is empty, it's simply the world itself, existence itself. It's everything at the same time, while not being anything in particular.

The particular self-awarenesses belongs to human bodies. The feelings, sensations of these self-awarenesses belong to human bodies. Several Eastern philosophies have come up with a subtle form of narcissism, where they think that the sensation of their own self-awareness is how the "One consciousness" feels, but the truth is that the "One consciousness" doesn't feel like anything.

Hmmm. Can you quote the source of your statements? Or are they our own observations?

You say that like you had any proof of your own, with non-philosophical / non-religious sources.
Only a few species on Earth including humans seem to exhibit self-awareness, seems to roughly correlate with brain size. And when you enter deep meditation, everything can fall away except self-awareness.

[AmericanKestrel]

Self-awareness/atma/spirit is the same as the One Conciousness that is conditioned by body-mind and pervades within all names and forms. When body-mind is gone, self-awareness remains. Individual minds gather thoughts and memories. The atma/spirit remains pure, and is the only Seer, always the subject.

As I said it's not so simple, Hindus have been fooling for themselves for eons. Yes it's true that there is only one "Seer", the eternal witness. But this "Seer" is empty, it's simply the world itself, existence itself. It's everything at the same time, while not being anything in particular.

The particular self-awarenesses belongs to human bodies. The feelings, sensations of these self-awarenesses belong to human bodies. Several Eastern philosophies have come up with a subtle form of narcissism, where they think that the sensation of their own self-awareness is how the "One consciousness" feels, but the truth is that the "One consciousness" doesn't feel like anything.

Hmmm. Can you quote the source of your statements? Or are they our own observations?

You say that like you had any proof of your own, with non-philosophical / non-religious sources.
Only a few species on Earth including humans seem to exhibit self-awareness, seems to roughly correlate with brain size. And when you enter deep meditation, everything can fall away except self-awareness.

You want non-philosophical sources in a philosophy forum?

[Atla]

As I said it's not so simple, Hindus have been fooling for themselves for eons. Yes it's true that there is only one "Seer", the eternal witness. But this "Seer" is empty, it's simply the world itself, existence itself. It's everything at the same time, while not being anything in particular.

The particular self-awarenesses belongs to human bodies. The feelings, sensations of these self-awarenesses belong to human bodies. Several Eastern philosophies have come up with a subtle form of narcissism, where they think that the sensation of their own self-awareness is how the "One consciousness" feels, but the truth is that the "One consciousness" doesn't feel like anything.

Hmmm. Can you quote the source of your statements? Or are they our own observations?

You say that like you had any proof of your own, with non-philosophical / non-religious sources.
Only a few species on Earth including humans seem to exhibit self-awareness, seems to roughly correlate with brain size. And when you enter deep meditation, everything can fall away except self-awareness.

You want non-philosophical sources in a philosophy forum?

My 'philosophy' is that philosophy and science have to be consistent (scientific Advaita / scientific Zen / scientific nondualism for example). People don't have to agree with that of course.
Imo science has shown that the correct philosophy is nondualism, but the main version of nondualism is still mostly wishful thinking. By the way, there don't seem to be other nondualists on the forum.

[CIN]

To readers who are philosophical zombies, please do not attempt to answer the below question, and please do not post in or participate in this thread. In other words, if you are not or do not have a spirit (a.k.a. consciousness), please do not answer the question or participate in this topic.

Ex hypothesi, the behaviour of zombies is indistinguishable from that of non-zombies, so your request is futile. The zombies will answer the question just as if they were non-zombies, because the zombies don't know they aren't non-zombies.

This question is only for truly conscious people. In other words, this question is only for non-zombies. This is because philosophical zombies will not understand what is meant by the words you, me, and I in the question.

Zombies understand these words exactly as functionalists think we all understand them, i.e. if they behave as if they understand them, then in fact they understand them. Whether functionalists are right about this, I have no idea. I'm a mysterian: I don't think we can know what consciousness is or how it relates to the brain. It looks from the outside as if consciousness is something the body does, whereas from the inside it looks as if the body is something possessed by consciousness. There's no way of finding out the truth, because we don't have access to the data, i.e. we can't see what links body to consciousness. We only have two faculties that bear on this, perception and introspection, and neither gives us any information about the link. Perception tells us that consciousness is a property of certain types of behaviour; introspection tells us that it's nothing of the kind. One of them is lying, but we can't tell which. (Perhaps they are both lying.)

In the sense that the words are used in this topic, if I said the word "you" to a philosophical zombie, I would be referring to something that doesn't actually exist, since the word 'you' in the sense used in this topic refers to something that the zombie lacks by definition.

You can't be sure that there is anything for 'you' to refer to in the way you want to use it.

With those important clarifications in mind, if you are a not a philosophical zombie

I know I'm not, but you have no reason to believe me.

please do let me know your answer to the following question:

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories, and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

It depends on two things: whether consciousness is a Cartesian substance (this is an unpopular idea these days, because it's hard to see how it could work; but as far as I know it has never actually been refuted), and if so, whether it's the kind of thing that can store memories. If the answer to the first is 'yes', there would be a difference to notice, but whether I would notice it depends on whether I could retain any memories from my old body in my consciousness.

I'm with Terrapin on one point: I think this is all speculative fantasising, and has nothing much to do with philosophy.

[Gertie]

CIN

This question is only for truly conscious people. In other words, this question is only for non-zombies. This is because philosophical zombies will not understand what is meant by the words you, me, and I in the question.

Zombies understand these words exactly as functionalists think we all understand them, i.e. if they behave as if they understand them, then in fact they understand them. Whether functionalists are right about this, I have no idea.

Functionalism just dodges the question raised by the notion of philosophical zombies doesn't it? By ignoring the issue of how/why/if phenomenal 'what it is like' conscious experience exists.

[Count Lucanor]

If you went to sleep in my body in my bed with my memories,

This does not start well. Being Scott's body, Scott's bed and Scott's memories, how could it be me that went to sleep? In what sense this experience would become my experience?

and awoke in your body in your bed with your memories, would you notice a difference? Would there be a difference to notice?

I do that everyday, I awake in my body, in my bed, with my memories. To notice a difference, I would need to have experienced something else. I guess the answer depends on the response to my first question.