Thoughts on RessurXion

[WeaponX]

but "original" Scott is not around anymore. So this is essentially the same guy, except he doesn't know what happened 20 minutes ago.

No essentially it’s a completely new person with the old ones memories implanted into them. I’ll ask this way if they offered you this process to get into a new body that will age super slow would you do it. Oh by the way we’ll download your Brain Monday but make the switch that Wednesday.

[WeaponX]

I really think we will find out something goes horribly wrong with clones forcing Moria to try for another life which will be dawn of x.

[Havok83]

I really think we will find out something goes horribly wrong with clones forcing Moria to try for another life which will be dawn of x.

Dawn of X feels way too similar to the world being built in HoX for me to buy that its a new life.

As for the topic, all the X-men that died in #4 are dead. These clones are not the same as the originals. In fact, I believe the ones that died in #4 were clones themselves. Im hoping the twist is that the originals are in a pod hidden somewhere on Krakoa

[Tycon]

These backups are the essence of each mutant. How they think, how they feel, their memories—their very being.

Magneto: The first was copying the mind—the essence, the anima—of any mutant Xavier found. So he could one day put a soul back into its mutant shell.

So while this debate about clones or not is fun and all, it’s ignoring what is established to believe that these are anything but the originals.

[Ultimate Rogue]

I dunno

I came here for sugah, but my existential beliefs are being challenged. Existential beliefs forged and sculpted from a young age by a tragedy, and so hurts 'n loss 'n grief, and happy stuffs also, obviously, but yeah, Hickman is kinda expecting a lot from me, and so soon too, all a bit forward of him, really. All up in my face

I can't help but eventually force my own detachment from a loved one whose died. It stopped me feeling sad/angry and so.

So yeah, death means dead.

In comics I can still enjoy a character that has been resurrected, as if nothing has happened, but it's not ideal, and I do remember when I was initially deep diving into these character bios, that a resurrected characters resurrection was a bit of an 'obstacle' or 'resistance' for me to overcome.



I've got my theory on what Hickman is actually getting to , and that this resurrection stuff is only a means to an end, and so I'm not gonna invest deep held preferences and rationality either way, yet.

[TOTALITY]

These “resurrections” are completely different from how characters came back from the dead previously. In those cases the original body is revived no need to put a soul back in. This is a copy of a body that they download copies of memories into.

I’ll ask this if they are bring back the original person than how come they could complete the whole process with the original still alive? It’s the whole reason for the confirmation of death protocol they mention. If you were really bringing back the original how could you possibly do it while they are still alive? To me that screams it’s a copy.

As far as your third point would you ever consider yourself immortal because your memories are stored on a computer? I wouldn’t. And your Cyclops example is wonky as well unless his becomes an empty shell when said mind is downloaded into the machine all he did was make a copy of himself.

It’s a copy and it’s real. There’s no difference. The reason they confirm a person’s death before the resurrection isn’t because they couldn’t both have a soul at the same time; it’s because they’re accommodating the majority’s closely held, but flawed, concept of a soul as something purely supernatural that can’t be copied.

How many resurrections have we seen that didn’t acknowledge the concept of a soul at all, yet the story took them seriously and moved on, so we did too? I don’t understand why now everyone is so bent on defining a real person in a way that would make a lot more stories break down than this one.

Does this all sort of amount to “don’t try to tell me I wouldn’t be superior to a hypothetical perfect copy of myself”? Because if it was possible to create a copy of me as complete as the ones described here, I certainly don’t think I’m in possession of some totally separate thing granted by god or whatever that would make me superior. I think the copy would have just as much right to live my life as I would, and THAT is why it wouldn’t be considered ethical to make such a copy while I’m still alive; not because I have a soul that the copy would lack.

I know souls are a thing in Marvel, but that’s meant to open story possibilities, not make stories harder to tell. The concept allows stories that deal with a person’s being in supernatural terms, but it isn’t to say that a story that does it only in scientific terms is incomplete. And to HOX’s credit, it nicely covers the way the scientific overlaps with the spiritual. Every Marvel character exists in a world of sci-fi and of magic at all times, even when only one is being highlighted — they’re just different ways of dealing with the same things.

[Tasuxeda]

No essentially it’s a completely new person with the old ones memories implanted into them. I’ll ask this way if they offered you this process to get into a new body that will age super slow would you do it. Oh by the way we’ll download your Brain Monday but make the switch that Wednesday.

I would do it I mean i know it wouldn't technically be me but even if I didn't consider my copy to be me than I would consider them to be my child who has inherited my place in the world, my memories and personality plus losing a day's memory that is nothing major I mean I have no real memories of what I was doing one month ago beyond my general routine.

[HeartofTheStoriesWeTell]

I would do it I mean i know it wouldn't technically be me but even if I didn't consider my copy to be me than I would consider them to be my child who has inherited my place in the world, my memories and personality plus losing a day's memory that is nothing major I mean I have no real memories of what I was doing one month ago beyond my general routine.

I guess it depends on the week...am i due to marry, or have kids...also did i die or go through a painful experience....

[Zaja]

Maybe a little off topic, but, where does the idea that clones can't have a soul come from? By that logic, neither can identical twins.

[Triniking1234]

Well twins aren't clones so I'm not sure why you brought that in.

[WeaponX]

It’s a copy and it’s real. There’s no difference. The reason they confirm a person’s death before the resurrection isn’t because they couldn’t both have a soul at the same time; it’s because they’re accommodating the majority’s closely held, but flawed, concept of a soul as something purely supernatural that can’t be copied.

How many resurrections have we seen that didn’t acknowledge the concept of a soul at all, yet the story took them seriously and moved on, so we did too? I don’t understand why now everyone is so bent on defining a real person in a way that would make a lot more stories break down than this one.

Does this all sort of amount to “don’t try to tell me I wouldn’t be superior to a hypothetical perfect copy of myself”? Because if it was possible to create a copy of me as complete as the ones described here, I certainly don’t think I’m in possession of some totally separate thing granted by god or whatever that would make me superior. I think the copy would have just as much right to live my life as I would, and THAT is why it wouldn’t be considered ethical to make such a copy while I’m still alive; not because I have a soul that the copy would lack.

I know souls are a thing in Marvel, but that’s meant to open story possibilities, not make stories harder to tell. The concept allows stories that deal with a person’s being in supernatural terms, but it isn’t to say that a story that does it only in scientific terms is incomplete. And to HOX’s credit, it nicely covers the way the scientific overlaps with the spiritual. Every Marvel character exists in a world of sci-fi and of magic at all times, even when only one is being highlighted — they’re just different ways of dealing with the same things.

So when you’re asked to send in an original signed copy of a document you just run three the copy machine and send the one it’s spits out because hey it’s no different?

And I’m not arguing that it’s some how lesser than me only that it isn’t me. And that’s kinda the entire point of resurrection it’s you not just an exact copy actually you.

[WeaponX]

Maybe a little off topic, but, where does the idea that clones can't have a soul come from? By that logic, neither can identical twins.

What’s being argued is a clone can’t have a soul transferred to it by downloading memories into it.

[Ultimate Rogue]

I don't mean to de-rail thread either, but....

About that last note on page, Who's gonna be freaky friday body swapped!!!

[WeaponX]

I guess to me this just sounds like someone saying hey I programmed a computer with all my memories and gave it a personality just like mine. As long as that computer still runs I’m immortal!! Meanwhile everyone else is thinking no a simulation of you is immortal you’re still gone once you die.

To be clear I’m willing to except they are the originals because Hickman and marvel say so. It’s just that the logic doesn’t fly.

[Zaja]

Well twins aren't clones so I'm not sure why you brought that in.

Monozygotic twins are almost genetically identical to one another and as such, technically, they are kind of a clone of each other, or at least the closest we can approach. Although the role of the environment does cause phenotypic variation, and two monozygotic twins do not encounter the exact same environment. In that sense, they can eventually grow up to be very different people. Then again, I doubt most people would consider Madelyne and Jean the same individual, at least personality-wise.