If we replace one by one every nerve, neuron etc of the brain with an artificial version, one which performs the same function completely, we would surely still exist and be the same conscious living being we are now?
If we take segments from the brain and replace them one by one, the same as above occurs.
If we keep the old segments alive, building the brain back up again, what would be the case;
A] the old brain would be ‘you’ and the original consciousness, and the copy would mimic that but would be its own consciousness?
B] the consciousness, if conscious, would have remained and hence would now exist in the new brain/artificial brain?
C] you can divide ad-infinitum. You can build different levels of consciousness ranging from simple to human, and all humans/Artificial consciousnesses are different machines, and not just that species are different.
If you build a ship/consciousness supporting construct, it is THE ship of Theseus, and all other copies are ships of x,y,z? So all you need for an artificial conscious life-form is the right mechanism?
The basis for consciousness is produced by the machine which can wield it?
So consciousness is something that ‘happens’ when there is support for its existence?
A duplicate would not be you , it would be itself. Ever watch the original Star Trek? Doctor McCoy did not want to ever get transported. The person at the end of the transportation would not be him. He would be killed as soon as he was hit by the transporter field. Well, not just him , everyone transporting is killed every time they transport.
In Roddenberry’s books he explains McCoy’s position better then the show did.
all of which assumes there ‘is something’ that is you ~ such that would ‘die’. The consciousness is surely manifest relative to the machine/organism, if you construct the necessary means of what it takes to be you, then you/your consciousness will exist.
If you destroyed that then built it again, then that would be you!
If you build two, then there are two consciousnesses like you, but your experience & spatial location denotes which one of them is ‘you’.
I would also consider that the consciousness may not ultimately be singular, the duality of mind and machine infers an ever greater fluidity as I see it?
I understand what you are saying and can agree to a point.
It might be true if you have no knowledge of the change. Yet, as McCoy knew the process he knew he died every time he used the transporter. There was always a subtle change in McCoy afterward. Self but, not.
Knowledge will make a different being… Does this make sense?? If not I will try to explain differently.
You have no evidence of your claims, Amorphos. For all you know the consciousness would not transfer into the clone. I don’t think it would transfer, because its in a different space time than the original. However, the teleporter might transfer it because it uses some kind of wormhole technology to keep the same energy patterns.
So someone copies you in this fashion. Would you let them shoot the first body. You know, the one from whose perspective the bullet would be aimed at its head?
As does perspective. I did suggest earlier that different processes will manifest new duplicate consciousnesses. Ok let me put my position like this;
The ‘machine’ [let us include anything which can support consciousness] biological or not, ‘contains’ your consciousness. If you had the tech to build you from scratch and ended up with the same resulting human that is you, that would have been you ~ if say instead of being born naturally this procedure had occurred, resulting in the same thing, it would be the same thing!
If you then performed the same process again in exactly the same way, that would not be you, it would be like a twin/clone [or some perfect replica]. If you took both and made them conjoined there would in practice [I remember seeing an example on a documentary] be two people sharing the same brain.
If there is no duplicate as like when McCoy transports, then the very same thing [‘machine’] which substantiated him previously, occurs at an alternative spatial location. Its the same hands cupping the same ball, and not a copy in the sense of being a duplicate. Ergo that would still be him irrespective of variance in some information due to thought being in constant flux.
Trixie
We are changing each part one by one, so at which point do we stop and say this is no longer the same person? What if they were talking to you throughout the procedure, and what if you done the procedure in stages over time etc. Brain scans would show consciousness activity and if there are two at some point or if it is lost.
I don’t see why changing a nerve bundle in the brain, is so different to changing one in say, your leg?
.
What part of it is ‘in a different space time than the original’ in this scenario?
The teleporter wont require wormhole tech lol, dont you know that consciousness is essentially inspatial or unspatial ~ has no specific spatial location until one is denoted. Then because that is one [a oneness], then as soon as it is located it is the singular observer!
Quantum ‘mechanics’ occur after the globals and between them and micro/macro world. You can probably change the info any which way, and still have the same observer/singularity. Why would a complete change of personality be any different to picking a new game character?
Moreno
ha, nice one… If I knew the technology had measurably shown me to have crossed over [see above], and my subjective waking experience also told me that ~ if say I had been conscious through the procedure, then I would not shoot the old body/brain, because it would be someone else, and that would be murder.
It gets more intricate when deciding inheritances etc lol.
In the false world, you must die and can only restore copies of yourself imperfectly for a few years.
In the true world, your soul has a unique and true essence, and sometimes it lasts for many many more years.
Most arguments are based in the false world, and are about the inconsistency of the false world, but most often it’s about the false world being considered the true world due to its malignant indestructible nature.
Yes but those ‘halves’ will be mixed all over the brain, and the consciousness would be making utility of them one at a time. we are just changing multi-switches around!
You can change the pattern/info and the same consciousness is still there, this is happening all the time and may be the very thing which cups its hands and supports consciousness. Ergo ‘it’ is not in the pattern. Life appears to occur where there are information systems in continual flux/change.
Naming something or someone does change a thing, surely.
Dan
False world? All things are reals in some way surely?
Well, sure, but this is a rigged answer. If you ‘knew’ and the technology had ‘shown’. Those assumptions presume that it is you. They also assume it is possible to measure what sounds like a non-corporeal you.
The false world is real, but it is less real than the true world.
The true world is when we see all or most forms of energy at the same time.
It’s a matter of range and perception.
the theory is based upon the idea that, at some point we will know how consciousness and the brain works. here I am just getting into the mechanics of the thing.
If you don’t get rid of the old, one by one, but instead build up a new brain, imho that latter brain would not contain you/your consciousness. Your consciousness would have ‘stayed in the same place’ as it were.
This is true, but experiments with devices appear to measure e.g. That the consciousness is not active during sleep, even though the brain is active [which denotes a difference]. Consciousness is at some level brain function, even if there is no actual part of the physical brain which >is< consciousness.
You are right in that I for one wouldn’t trust such devices, until such things are known for sure. Atm we don’t know what consciousness and ‘world projection’ is.
But assumes that consciousness is binary. It is there or it is not. Rather than that you would be slowly making the consciousness less and less, by degrees, the one that was there before. Like say taking and impressionist painting, Seurat’s of the people by the banks of the Seine, and replacing each ‘pixel’ dab of paint that is until it is a painting of the moon. New paint, new image. Now if we recreated Seurat’s original image - using new paint of course - it might seem like the same painting, but it is really as different and the one of the moon. Slowly over time, we changed the painting. No reason to assume that consciousness is a lump unit, but rather it is a batch. IOW during the replacement you would become less and less yourself. Not functionally, but in terms of identity. And since we could use the pieces we take out to build a brain of yours somewhere else, it should be clear that it will not be you. Unless you believe there is a ghost in the machine that is ‘magnetized’ to the best host.
Interesting argument. I have considered consciousness to be fluidic, ultimately empty ~ a oneness. But then I wondered why it would be any different to having an artificial finger? If the artificial finger replaced the function and connectivity of the organic nerves etc, would you still be Theseus? If so, then surely changing a part of your brain would be the same.
Either way I doubt there is a limit to how many duplicate consciousnesses can be produced. So its the same question - if I may, as asking if you change every time a brain cell dies, or a bunch of them if you hit your head? So ultimately the consciousness would never remain the same, and can hardly be thought of as existing in its own right. Then you have no ship and no Theseus!
In the case of conjoined twins sharing the same brain, there was noticeably two people there. Looking at the parts does not yield the truth concerning what they constitute ~ the whole [when there are two wholes in the one brain]. The ‘you’/the subjective conscious experiencer, occurs when the brain resolves its function and calibration into the singular. In the above case the brain realized two bodies joined to one brain, and so resolved itself into two individuals.
The experiment would essentially be doing the same thing, ergo; the location of the subjective observer, denotes who, what and where you are. IF you had the technology to move that, then people could swap bodies and duplicate ad-infinitum.
If you changed it, how is it the same?
It is only “the same consciousness” because YOU chose to name it that … usually because it grew out of the former consciousness from before the change.
The physical reality of it was never a “Theseus’ ship” or a “Bob” or a “consciousness”. All of the things that you are talking about are your own mental constructs. As far as the universe itself is concerned, Theseus never had a ship.