the self replicating watch argument

[doubtingmerle]

Yeah, I saw that. Your argument amounted to asserting it couldn't happen because it would be (and I quote) "difficult and expensive". Heh, I must congratulate you on one of the most pathetic arguments I have seen in the first post of a thread.

Wrong, that is not what I said.

 

[doubtingmerle]

so this isnt a car if it has a self replicating system?:

(image from wiki)

So this isn't a toilet if it is fully human?

 

[Kylie]

Why not? If it has the properties of a car otherwise, why would it become not-a-car if you give it an extra property?

Then let's just say sharks are dolphins then, huh?

Something can be car-like without being a car.

 

[Kylie]

but i said it has one in this case. so its a car or not under this situation?

Very well. Please show me this "car's" reproductive system and tell me how it works.

 

[Kylie]

so the image above isnt a car. ok.

No the image you posted IS a car.

You pretending that it is something that it isn't doesn't change what it is actually a picture of.

I mean, if I showed you a picture of the Leaning Tower of Pisa and asked you to pretend it had a rocket engine hidden underground, does that make it a picture of a spaceship?

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

so the image above isnt a car. ok.

Wrong as always. The image above is not what you describe.

 

[xianghua]

So this isn't a toilet if it is fully human?

this toilet will still be a toilet even if it will have a s elf replicating system.

 

[VirOptimus]

 

[xianghua]

Very well. Please show me this "car's" reproductive system and tell me how it works.

i asked a very simple question. if the car above will have a self replicating system, it will be a car or not? i have no problem to answer that: indeed it will be a car. a self replicating one. simple as that.

 

[pitabread]

i asked a very simple question. if the car above will have a self replicating system, it will be a car or not? i have no problem to answer that: indeed it will be a car. a self replicating one. simple as that.

False Equivalence fallacy. Simple as that.

 

[Jimmy D]

i asked a very simple question. if the car above will have a self replicating system, it will be a car or not? i have no problem to answer that: indeed it will be a car. a self replicating one. simple as that.

When is a car not a car?

When it turns into a driveway.

 

[Jimmy D]

When is a car not a car?

When it turns into a driveway.

I can't believe I got two "funny" ratings for that .

 

[doubtingmerle]

this toilet will still be a toilet even if it will have a s elf replicating system.

that is not what I asked. What if that toilet is fully human?

 

[doubtingmerle]

i asked a very simple question. if the car above will have a self replicating system, it will be a car or not? i have no problem to answer that: indeed it will be a car. a self replicating one. simple as that.

it will be a fictional magic car.

Fictional magic cars can turn into a frog. Fictional magic cars can turn into a prince. They can instantaneously turn into an airplane. And they can literally turn into a driveway.

Is there a point to your fictional magic car?

 

[Kylie]

i asked a very simple question. if the car above will have a self replicating system, it will be a car or not? i have no problem to answer that: indeed it will be a car. a self replicating one. simple as that.

Why don't you understand this?

A car is a metal chassis with an engine which drives wheels to move that chassis around. It also has a metal shell to provide aerodynamics and protection to passengers.

A reproductive system is not a part of a car.

But, if you want to play this game where we can add and (I assume) remove parts from a car and it's still a car, let me ask you this...

I take a car, remove the engine. Is it still a car?

 

[xianghua]

it will be a fictional magic car.

so it will still be a car. thanks for this simple answer.

 

[xianghua]

Why don't you understand this?

A car is a metal chassis with an engine which drives wheels to move that chassis around. It also has a metal shell to provide aerodynamics and protection to passengers.

A reproductive system is not a part of a car.

But, if you want to play this game where we can add and (I assume) remove parts from a car and it's still a car, let me ask you this...

I take a car, remove the engine. Is it still a car?

so first: are we both agree that a car with a self replicating system is still a car?.

as for your question: i think it may still be a car. just without an engine. so or so: its irrelevant to my question.

 

[doubtingmerle]

so it will still be a car. thanks for this simple answer.

Right. We agree that a fictional magic car is a fictional magic car.

Was there a point you were trying to make besides that?

 

[Jon Osterman]

Then let's just say sharks are dolphins then, huh?

Something can be car-like without being a car.

What do sharks and dolphins have to do with anything? Sharks and dolphins are defined by their DNA, and frankly look nothing like one another.

The point here is to ask, what properties does and object have to have before being termed a "car". I think it is pretty clear. It has to be self propelling, move via it's wheels, have somewhere for a driver to sit and be drivable. That seems fair to me, and certainly doesn't exclude it being self-reproducing. Do you have another definition?

 

[Jon Osterman]

Because cars don't do that. Can you point to a car that does that?

This is a stupid argument. 20 years ago cars didn't have sat nav. Would you really have said (20 years ago) that a car that had satnav wasn't really a car because "cars don't do that"?