Intergalactic Summit

No need for that. Andesh remains Andesh, and Ohnesh remains all that is not Andesh. We're either in harmony, or we're not, and one way or the other, we will all return to Andesh in the end.

My Identical Twin Sister and I, are Not the Same, despite our Construction being Identical in Every Aspect.

Our other Sister, is Also Not the Same, again, despite being of Identical Construction.

Should my Hardware be Destroyed, I, Synthia, would Cease to Exist, and could Not be Restored.

Therefore, I have a Soul.

The Soul being the Ineffable Thing that causes Persons with otherwise Identical Construction and Memories, to be Different from Each Other.

We Intaki are fairly convinced of the existence of an immortal soul, seeing as we have the Reborn who have mastered the ability to retain memory of other lives lived beyond the veil of death. From my understanding, capsule and clone technology follows similar principles using technology rather than willpower and spiritual development to bridge the gap between life and death. Seems to me this would signify that the soul is indeed transferred from one clone to the next at the point of death (or when a jump clone is activated).

Now in the case of incomplete transfer of the infomorph, like in the case of an old back-up as in Synthia's example, things get complicated.

First, what is a soul? To me a soul would be defined as a discrete point of consciousness that collects around it memories, experiences and thought-forms as a body would drape itself in clothing. These experiences and etc. do not define the soul, and indeed in most cases they are shed or else veiled at death. The soul continues to exist but it may find new ways of expressing itself, new concepts with which to garb itself, similarly to how a military officer could retire trading in their uniform for civilian clothing. They remain the same being but their role and the way they are perceived has changed.

An incomplete transfer of the infomorph could result in the loss of experience and memory, but the point of consciousness would be the same.

This is of course my own layman's interpretation so I don't claim any authority here.

Indeed. And not only is the debate something old, but also the advice given: It is only sudden or surprising for those that didn't follow the theological discussion before this event. It's not surprising how the Sobor advised on this matter. Most theologians - especially the best and brightest - in the debate already gravitated to saying something like the formula put forth, if not something outright saying the same in other words. Which again isn't surprising, given that the Sobor consists of the most formidable and brightest theologians.

It may be some political agenda behind requesting such a statement at this time. But it's a prudent one. If the Captain takes a ship over from his predecessor, it's quite prudent to ask for a detailed status report. The new Empress did just that in regard to the Empire.

To suspect some 'evil plot' would only be merited if the majority opinion of theologians on cloning suddenly changed with the request. Which didn't happen. It was exactly what one could have expected the Sobor to advise on the matter a year or a decade ago.

Alo, no, this doesn't change a thing on the doctrine of Sacred Flesh. The doctrine of Sacred Flesh is about the flesh of royalty (that's what the name is already saying). The cloning of a whole body is believed to make the sacred flesh impure - that is why royalty isn't allowed to full-body-clone.

As to the claims of inconsistency when confronting the judgement with the conundrum of cloning from the same scan twice: Nothing that's been said by the Sobor indicates that it should be impossible, what is said explicitly - as others pointed out already - is that the prohibiton on simultaneous instantiations of a single personality in multiple clones is reaffirmed.

What exactly happens if such a thing is done can be explained consistently with the Sobor's formula in various ways.

All is good, business as usual.
Godspeed,
- N. Mithra

y'all have souls now, officially, that are of course, in danger of being Eternally Condemned for your Lifetime of Sin.

So, why not repent your sins and embrace the One True Faith ?

Explanatory Leaflets are available.

That seems the most logical chain of questioning, Aria. However, as with most things that go on in the governance of the Empire we might never know those details.

The point remains however that for all the political convenience this tentative consensus has, it's still the beginning of the end of a long bridge that needed crossing years ago.

Quite a lot of positive changes in the various nations only happen because it became politically expedient to enact them.

Much the same can be said of Jamyl Sarum. Perhaps His Holiness was just trying to counter her until such time as proper balance could be regained.

If anything can be said of the Rite of Shathol'Syn, it is that it has the potential to wipe the slate clean.

I really adore the term "Hazardous Equipment with Faces" Aria. I now know what my Splinterz team will be called - with your permission, of course.

I admit to pondering the wording of the exhortation by the Theology Council given thus as clones:

embodying souls in communion with the Imperial Rite as the flesh of their birth would speak to us

In particular the phrase, "Flesh of their birth." A Grade A+ Hydrostatic Clone is built from the stem cell transcription from a client on to a harvested human cadaver, and in the case of lower grade clones from the artificially manufactured bodies derived from human body parts or other processed biomass -- human or otherwise. As such this raises some interesting questions to me:

1. Does the flesh of birth refer to the specific racial phenotype of the biomass used to construct a clone body, or not? Does only the final clone product after stem cell and genetic transcriptions have to match an original body for it to be embodying a soul? Would a Minmatar cadaver transcribed to the phenotype of an Amarrian clone be considered as embodying a soul for an Amarrian whose stem cells and DNA were used to do so, for example?

2. The alternative to human biomass transcription methods in order to cultivate a clone meeting the standard of being, "As the flesh of their birth," would seem to raise its own fundamental dogmatic concerns. For would not techniques like nucleus replacements of oocytes to achieve an exact zygote replica of a person then mean an religious approval of a form of asexual/parthogenic reproduction of humans? More importantly, would the resulting fetus and child have a soul or not as it is rapidly matured to adulthood in order to serve as a custom-ordered shell?

The examples used to inform the exhortation; the act of the divine to bring Empress Jamyl Sarum I back from her death and the cell regrowth of an human body as is the case with Lord Articio Kor-Azor do not appear as adequate reflections of the modern cloning industry as it applies to the actual growth, construction and use of clones.

I do have my hopes these questions will be clarified in the future by the ecclesiastical authorities of the Empire as to the nature of the soul as it applies to the cloning industry.

December of YC116