You can't step into the same river twice

Not only because the river is constantly changing, "YOU" are constantly changing too, hence the title.

If some philosophers are correct (namely the 4-dimensionalists), then you are not the same person as the person a year ago. Nor are you the same person an hour ago. Not even a second ago.

I know what you are thinking. You are thinking: of course I am not the same person I was a second ago. I have changed, slightly, from moment to moment. Compare the you 10 years ago and the you now, there will have been differences in terms of physical states and beliefs and desires. If we assume that the changes take place along a continuum of time, gradually and smoothly, then there will be changes however imperceptible every second. (At the very least, each breath you take will cause chemical changes throughout your body, resulting in minute changes at every moment in time.)

But that's not what those philosophers meant. You are not the same person not because you are a changed person at every following second. You are not even a changed person from the previous second because the previous "you" are not even you AT ALL.

Now what does that mean exactly, to say that the previous "you"-s are not even you at all? In layman terms, it means that a second ago, there is a person who looks almost exactly like you, who shares nearly all of your beliefs and desires, and wants to do almost nearly everything that the current you is doing. But that person is not you. He looks like you, acts like you, thinks like you; he thinks he will be you, and you think you had been him, but he is not you, neither are you him.

You are not the same person as the person who started reading this page. Nor are you the same person as the person who started reading this sentence. You exist only at an instant. For the length of reading this page, an infinity of you would have existed and flickered out, each thinking (naively) that they have existed all along with a history of, say, 20 odd years, and will continue to exist for quite some time yet.

How do we explain the appearance of personal history that we appear to be able to call up in our memories? Each of the instantaneous you possess an entire set of beliefs, desires, and memories, each largely coherent with the preceding you. For example you at time T would possess the memories of having sat down at the table and the current experiences of sitting down at the table; you at time T+1 would possess the memories of sitting down at the table and the current experiences of reading this post; you at time T+2 would have the memories of reading this post, and the current experiences of trying to remember all the memories you have since childhood in order to prove this post wrong; you at time T+3 would have the memories of trying to remember all the memories you have since childhood in order to prove this post wrong and the current experiences of doing that some more., etc.

All the memories are merely apparent memories. They are real memories, but only in the sense that they appear to be of the current you doing certain things in the past. But you never did those things, your previous selves might have, but they weren't you.

In fact, you don't need to have the previous selves in order to have those memories. They could simply have appeared in the repertoire of the current you's mind without there being any previous beings having done whatever you thought you have done in those memories.

You could simply be an instantaneous being who appeared and disappeared, thinking that it has lived for quite some time, and will live for some time yet, and there being no other instantaneous you-s before or after you.

You are thinking: now this surely is absurd. I reflect now, and I can just feel it. There is a whole history stretching back from me. I remember me doing all those stuff. Look, I am touching my cheek now. I shall vividly remember this feeling. 2 seconds later, I am pretty sure that it is the same me who did that cheek-touching; I have that experience in me now, even. Surely I am not mistaken about that!

But you are, if those philosophers are correct. You only think that you are the same person who did the cheek-touching. Maybe there has been a person who really did the cheek touching, but that person is not you, even if the details of the memories you have now is almost identical to the experiences that person has while touching his cheek.

Up till this point, I have not yet given any reasons for thinking this account of you surviving time is correct. But how do you know that it isn't?

Clement's Demon

Suppose one day a Demon pops up in front of you. He randomly chooses fifteen people and threatens to obliterate them with a single word, unless you agree to sacrifice 2 hours of your time everyday for 40 years devoted to counting sand.

Assuming that:

1. You do not take any pleasure whatsoever in counting sand (and most definitely none whatsoever in counting sand 2 hours everyday for the rest of your life);

2. You know (for sure) that the Demon will keep his word--he will not obliterate the people if you agree to sacrifice 2 hours of your time everyday for 40years. If at any point of time you break that agreement, he would obliterate the 15 chosen people immediately.

3. The 15 people will live for another 80 years yet if not obliterated by the Demon.

Would you do it? That is, do you think that the value of 15 human lives is great enough to warrant you giving up 2 hours of your life everyday for 40 years?

Scam kidnapping

Recently, my household has been hit by a series of scam calls.

The first was a few months ago, when I went for a Cameron Highlands trip. It was the last day of the trip (luckily), and I suddenly received a call from some private number. I didn't pick it up since I always get those irritating phone salespeople trying to sell me some stupid bonds. It rang on however, and I decided to pick it up on the second time. It was my aunt. She practically screamed at me, asking me where I am, and how come my mum is rushing out to pay some men who claimed to have kidnapped me.

So in a frenzy, I settled my aunt, and tried calling my mum. Her phone was engaged. So I tried calling my sis. Engaged too. Figured that my mum was talking to my sis. So I smsed the both of them. Minutes later, my sis called back, demanding the same questions as my aunt did. Then my mum called, and I reassured her that nothing's wrong, and that she should make a police report.

The rest of the day was spent in worrying thoughts of what would happen if the scammers decided that robbing us would be better than trying to scam us now that the scam failed.

As a result of that scam call, we changed our phone number and made it private.

The second scam call was a few weeks ago. I picked it up this time round. It was faint, as though the reception wasn't that good, and I vaguely heard someone talking. So I went "hello? hello? I can't hear you." Then the voice got progressively louder, like someone adjusting the mouthpiece. Then I heard someone crying, "(sob sob) I'm in trouble already. (sob sob.)" I didn't respond. Then he repeated himself. I hung up immediately.

It couldn't have been my dad, since it doesn't sound like him, neither does he sound like any of my friends. I was half tempted to laugh at him and call his bluff. But I decided not to incur his wrath, or we might get free pig head hanging on our door tmr.

So here's a word of caution for every of my friends out there. Such things do happen, and not only in the news. Somehow there is a greater urgency when it happens to people near us, and hence it would be good if you tell your parents about such incidents. My mum always caution us about such scam calls when she watches the news, but yet she panicked when it happened to her, and she didn't even think of calling me to verify. And don't think you are safe just because your number is private, because you are not.

Updates

If you haven't known it yet from my facebook updates, I've gotten a girlfriend, which would explain why I am always busy these days and almost never online. That is, if you count online only every other day as "almost never online"; relative to how I was really always online back in the old days, I think that's a fair exaggeration.

I didn't even game much these days. Of the past week, I think I gamed a grand total of 2.5 hours. Over the past month, probably only 3hrs. Luckily, instead of neglecting my work, I actually worked more: from 0 hour a day to 1-2hours a day. But that might just be due to stress from the approaching deadline.

I organized a philosophy introductory series for the year ones some time back. I gave the first talk, and it went rather well, in terms of the turn out and the reception of the talk. The philosophy society helped me do the advertising, so I have them to thank for it.

The second talk however, I did the "advertising" myself, which just involves pasting two posters at the department and nothing else. Worse still, the initial timing for the talk was changed 3 times, owing to unforeseen clashes with other classes (i.e. due to super bad planning on my part), and the final one still clashed with a logic module. As expected, the turn out was extremely bad: none showed up.

I owe an apology to weng hong for agreeing to give a talk but giving him no audience. Sorry!