I feel like you're misunderstanding my point. It's not a matter of comparability. It's a matter of outlook. 雪衣's philosophy is that her memories, whether fully intact or not, is enough for her to consider herself the same person. 寒鸦 treating her sister as the same person despite hardware changes (and malfunction) is a reflection of 雪衣's world view. 丹恒's continued reiteration that he is not 丹枫 is an expression of his world view.
Neither world view is wrong, neither is right. Of course how they (the characters) arrive at the answer regarding their identity is contingent on their personal experiences and cultural outlook. That's the whole point of exploring the philosophical divide.
The whole argument regarding the percentage of memories retained is completely off base and misunderstands how memory works. The argument you put forth presumes humans remember every little thing that happened in our lives like a computer, when the human brain actually forgets 80‐90% of our daily activities. Our memories are fragments of our lives, and the majority of the working memory is spent on storing mundane information like language, muscle control, self-care skills, etc., and not on the details of events. That doesn't mean we aren't shaped by the events that we don't remember nonetheless.
丹恒 clearly remembers many things he rightfully shouldn't know, such as appropriate salutation and correct ways of address. He shows no clumsiness when switching to Luofu coded speech patterns. He acts in a way that's indistinguishable from Luofu natives; that's a level of comfort that can only be gained from personal familiarity, not something learned from a book. He also fights in the exact same way as 丹枫 and emotes in a similar manner. This suggests far, far more memory recovery than 1%.
If a person lost their long term memory, but they continue to speak with the same mannerisms, walk with the same gait, react in the same way to others...has that person's identity changed? That's the philosophical question posed by the thought experiment of reincarnation and cyborg brains literary trope.
Traditionally, 雪衣's situation is challenged thusly: if a robot gained 100% of your brain patterns, does that robot become you? Interestingly, the usual literary answer to that question is no, despite have an identical copy of the brain, the robot identity is still a separate entity. While in HSR, 雪衣's answer is the opposite.
Similarly, 丹恒's situation is usually presented in literature as: if a soul is reincarnated (or exists in a parallel universe), can they still claim the same identity despite having very different life experiences? The traditional answer to that is usually yes, hence the concept of soul mates. But HSR also chose to give the opposite answer.
And that's why it would have been interesting for 丹恒 and 雪衣 have a chance to share their world views. This would show us their reasoning (which subverts the usual literary development) as well as help flesh out the characters.
Penacony is much more popular and well received than Xianzhou
So? Harry Potter is also immensely popular, it's still transphobic trash. When did popularity became a measure of quality?
There is zero resemblance with Zhuge Liang aside from the fan.
Again, so what? I'm talking about the relevance of showing a supposedly strategic person having cold sweats under pressure. That element alone is not enough to dismiss a character as "not strategic". My point is that it's the execution of the story element that matters, not the content.
no subject
Re: 雪衣 vs 丹恒
I feel like you're misunderstanding my point. It's not a matter of comparability. It's a matter of outlook. 雪衣's philosophy is that her memories, whether fully intact or not, is enough for her to consider herself the same person. 寒鸦 treating her sister as the same person despite hardware changes (and malfunction) is a reflection of 雪衣's world view. 丹恒's continued reiteration that he is not 丹枫 is an expression of his world view.
Neither world view is wrong, neither is right. Of course how they (the characters) arrive at the answer regarding their identity is contingent on their personal experiences and cultural outlook. That's the whole point of exploring the philosophical divide.
The whole argument regarding the percentage of memories retained is completely off base and misunderstands how memory works. The argument you put forth presumes humans remember every little thing that happened in our lives like a computer, when the human brain actually forgets 80‐90% of our daily activities. Our memories are fragments of our lives, and the majority of the working memory is spent on storing mundane information like language, muscle control, self-care skills, etc., and not on the details of events. That doesn't mean we aren't shaped by the events that we don't remember nonetheless.
丹恒 clearly remembers many things he rightfully shouldn't know, such as appropriate salutation and correct ways of address. He shows no clumsiness when switching to Luofu coded speech patterns. He acts in a way that's indistinguishable from Luofu natives; that's a level of comfort that can only be gained from personal familiarity, not something learned from a book. He also fights in the exact same way as 丹枫 and emotes in a similar manner. This suggests far, far more memory recovery than 1%.
If a person lost their long term memory, but they continue to speak with the same mannerisms, walk with the same gait, react in the same way to others...has that person's identity changed? That's the philosophical question posed by the thought experiment of reincarnation and cyborg brains literary trope.
Traditionally, 雪衣's situation is challenged thusly: if a robot gained 100% of your brain patterns, does that robot become you? Interestingly, the usual literary answer to that question is no, despite have an identical copy of the brain, the robot identity is still a separate entity. While in HSR, 雪衣's answer is the opposite.
Similarly, 丹恒's situation is usually presented in literature as: if a soul is reincarnated (or exists in a parallel universe), can they still claim the same identity despite having very different life experiences? The traditional answer to that is usually yes, hence the concept of soul mates. But HSR also chose to give the opposite answer.
And that's why it would have been interesting for 丹恒 and 雪衣 have a chance to share their world views. This would show us their reasoning (which subverts the usual literary development) as well as help flesh out the characters.
So? Harry Potter is also immensely popular, it's still transphobic trash. When did popularity became a measure of quality?
Again, so what? I'm talking about the relevance of showing a supposedly strategic person having cold sweats under pressure. That element alone is not enough to dismiss a character as "not strategic". My point is that it's the execution of the story element that matters, not the content.