The Metaphysics of Star Trek: Dr. Ira Graves failed to Cheat Death

My opponent is correct that my position seems counter intuitive at first. However the value of my position is that it is more logical and easier to argue. His position is based on gut feelings. What this debate really seeks to understand is what defines the "self". In that spirit, let us examine the question. We Are Not Our Body It cannot be said, that we are our body. Bodies change over time. At one point we a laughing giggling little babies, at another point we might become wrinkly old men who get around in wheel chairs. Our bodies change and we are something new. A tree that is carved into a chair is no longer a tree, despite coming from the same body. We can lose our arms and legs, our entire body and as long as our consciousness is in place we still consider us to be us. We are not our bodies. We Are Not Our Thoughts We know that the self is not the body. Our body changes. We have completely different bodies at 9 months old than at 90 years old, (Literally as cells replace themselves every so often) yet we are considered the same person. We are not our thoughts and memories either. We have completely different thoughts and memories 5 years ago than we do today, yet we consider ourselves the same person. Despite the fact that my body and brain may be completely different 5 years from now, I'm still the same person and responsible for decisions I made 5 years ago. The Self Revealed The majority of scholars would agree that the self is neither our thoughts or our bodies. Rene Descartes says; "I can abstract from the supposition of all external things, but not from the supposition of my own consciousness." Descartes argues that the self is our consciousness. David Hume argues something similar: "It is plain, that in the course of our thinking, and in the constant revolution of our ideas, our imagination runs easily from one idea to any other that resembles it, and that this quality alone is to the fancy a sufficient bond and association. It is likewise evident that as the senses, in changing their objects, are necessitated to change them regularly, and take them as they lie contiguous to each other, the imagination must by long custom acquire the same method of thinking, and run along the parts of space and time in conceiving its objects." What Hume is saying is that the self is basically the loose cohesion of personal experience. John Locke said a similar thing. The self is the continuation of your psychology. It isn't based on a current or past state of being, but the continuation of those states which are loosely connected. I repeat THE SELF IS THE CONTINUITY OF OUR PSYCHOLOGY Ira Graves The continuity of psychology arguments are relevant to Graves because the doctors psychology continued while using Data's hardware as a containment unit. Conclusion B I'd really like to address my opponents arguments now, because some of them just by happenstance are actually rebuttals to my argument. I think it's appropriate to address them here and may have anyway if he didn't mention them, but will refrain. I look forward to my opponents rebuttal round. Though he has anticipated my arguments well and basically provided no positive arguments up until this point. Good luck.