ARGUMENTS (1) 253Account says makes successive bundles so related to be parts of the same
person. The copy bears that relation R to the person who was annihilated. The
popular terms for a Digitator 101 is “Copy-Annihilator” (see Figure 1) but the
firm’s advertising department insists on using the more formal name. What
the Digitator 101 makes as it annihilates Edward we will call “Tedward” and
the question that arises is: Is Tedward identical to Edward? Since Tedward
bears relation R to Edward, the answer that a Complexity Account of Persons
must give is affirmative; Tedward is identical to Edward.
Scenario two
Our second scenario has Edward entering a Digitator 101X. Sales of the 101
model have been slow; people have been uncommonly shy about using the
ones that have been sold. The 101X model is popularly simply called the
Copier model (see Figure 2). When Edward enters it, it does not annihilate
Edward. Instead, it produces an exact copy of Edward, whom we will also
call Tedward. Thus Edward enters at time T1, and at time T2 the machine
has produced a being who bears to the Edward that entered the machine
relation R, as does of course Edward at T2. Here, two questions arise: Is
Edward at T2 identical to Edward at T1? Is Tedward identical to Edward?
Since both Edward at T2 and Tedward bear relation R to Edward at T1, a
Complexity Account of Persons must answer both questions in the
affirmative. Edward at T2 is identical to Edward at T1. Tedward is identical
to Edward. This, of course, raises a problem. Edward at T2 is not identical
Figure 1 Digitator 101