Is killing an alternate self murder or suicide?

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

If alternate universe me has the same feelings on meeting a "clone" or another version of myself, then it'd be self-defense justifiable homicide because it'd instantly be kill or be killed or temporary insanity defensible because I don't think I'd handle seeing another me in the same timespace very well and would flip out.
But in terms of "is it suicide?" no. We're talking about a different "you" that made different choices in life and thus is not the same exact person (so long as we're not talking same timeline, different era versions of self) and it counts as homicide. Its really only murder if it turns out you killing alternate you was simply out of an unjustified reason.

 

[TakerFoxx]

Even better question: is fucking an alternate version of yourself incest or masturbation? And, as a follow-up, assuming this alternate version was of compatible gender with your sexual orientation (flipped if straight, not if gay, YOLO if bi), would you?

 

[Kyrian007]

Its murder.

Its that simple. You kill, and you still exist... then murder. You kill, and then you don't exist anymore... suicide. That's aside from all of the "justified" argument or what have you. People have all sorts of justifications for murder, some valid... most not. That's not something that I'm getting into, just the pure question of "is it murder or suicide?" If you still exist afterwards... its murder.

 

[Pseudonym]

You clearly aren't a numerically identical person, so murder.

Murder is a human killing another human without a legally justifiable reason. It's a question of whether or not the kill was lawful.

I don't really think it matters. We can assume for the sake of argument that the killing was unlawful and/or immoral. Or we can disregard the law and just get to the point that is relevant to the thought experiment.

OP was too vague so I took the legality into consideration for the sake of the argument.

If I killed an alternate version of myself somewhere that a legitimate legal authority declared such an act unlawful and I had no valid reason for doing it, I have committed murder.

Is that satisfactory?

Fair enough. I have a bit of a rant beneath this about my annoyances at discussing thought experiments and it might come across as more hostile than I want it to. Sorry if it does.

Thing is, most thought experiments have holes to be poked into them of you look closely enough. The question is, whether those holes are important to the issue at hand.

I'll explain why this thing is sort of grating to me. Having studied philosophy I have been in multiple classes discussing thought experiments and very often there is that one person who manages to derail the entire conversation by thinking of a 'clever answer' that has little to do with the issue at hand, possibly five times in a row. Ussually it is just sheer inability to see the point but that can still be awfully annoying.

An example a friend once told me was the following, the context being whether it is ever ok to lie 'an attempting murderer chases his victim and the victim runs into your house to hide. The murderer knocks on your door and asks you whether his victim is in your house. Should you lie to him.' One person replied 'why don't you just shoot the murderer?'

Anyone who gets the point of the thought experiment, and has some feeling for how they work, can instantly rephrase the experiment such that you don't have your gun at hand, the murderer is actually three guys that you have no chance of beating in a fight, etc. In that way we could cover all of these annoying clever answers. The point is though, that if we have to do that, the conversation takes 30 minutes longer than it needs to and we waste our time discussing trivial objections. (I have similar thougts about people not getting the point of a comparison and just pointing out arbitrary differences between the two things being compared or just blankedly and indignantly stating 'you can't compare X to Y')

Yes, you took the legality into consideration but I don't see how that was for the sake of the argument. It might be for the sake of having some argument, but what seems to me like a distracting one. The OP was admittedly not exactly a beacon of clarity but the relevant distinction was clearly 'murder or suicide' and not 'murder or lawful killing'.

So the point I want to make, at the risk of repeating myself, is that to save time and effort it is important to distinguish the point of a thought experiment from it's more accidental features.

 

[wulf3n]

I suppose it depends on how you view an individual.

If it's simply genetic code, then probably suicide.

If you place more emphasis on personal experience and memories, then closer to murder.

 

[BrawlMan]

Even better question: is fucking an alternate version of yourself incest or masturbation? And, as a follow-up, assuming this alternate version was of compatible gender with your sexual orientation (flipped if straight, not if gay, YOLO if bi), would you?

This will require some thinking. No, wait, all of my thinking!

Other than that why don't we ask Gabe Yulaw. Take it away Mr. YuLaw

<spoiler= The One>
I'd say it's murder and suicide at the same time in a weird way.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Neither... it's self defence.


... after all, if I knew they were more 'evil' than me and I know they have a benefit to killing me, and that they were still like me, then my paranoia would be through the roof. And it would be justifiable simply because I know how they would think given their universe would have to be so similar to my own for an alternate universe me to emerge.

And like me... the idea that one of us benefits from the other's demise for any myriad of reasons, that neither of us can trust one another, that it was only a matter of time to see who was the first person to get a weapon and attack the other.

Self defence.

Hell, just by thinking about this subject... even if they weren't knowingly more 'evil' than me (or we scrap the concept of evil altogether), I might still have a go at alternate universe me due to the fact that their universe might be so similar that I'd feel confident in assuming alternate me has thought the same thing.

 

[the December King]

Ugh.

It's neither.

It's art therapy, and pretty egotistical to boot.

 

[axlryder]

Assuming we're defining murder as "killing another person", then murder. The moment someone's experiences diverge from your own, regardless of whether or not you were identical up to a point, they become an individual. After that you can look at any weird technicalities in the same frame you'd look at murder.