Re: Cryonics and uploading as leaps of faith?

From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 (gpmap@runbox.com)
Date: Mon Jun 30 2003 - 03:16:23 MDT

  • Next message: Michael Wiik: "[FYI]: google attains divinity"

    Of course it is correct that we do not yet know as much as we should on brain and consciousness. At the same time the point that I am trying to make is independent of a particular mechanism of consciousness:
    Question A: does the uploaded copy of person X wake up thinking and feeling that (s)he is X? Does (s)he feel continuity with X (going to sleep - waking up)?
    This is a scientific question that can be answered with a simple experiment: just ask the uploaded copy of X. I assume the answer depends on the details of a uploading technology, like how much and what kind of information it is able to copy and restore. I think this technology is a few decades away at least, but it seems reasonable to think that it will be developed sooner or later.
    Question B: assuming that the answer to Question A is yes (the uploaded copy feels that (s)he is X), is (s)he REALLY X?
    This does not look like a scientific question, since its formulation is such that it cannot be verified or falsified. It has often happened in the history of science that non-falsifiable questions have been found meaningless, e.g. which one is the correct frame of reference. If two things look the same, past scientific experience suggests that they are the same.
    Of course we still tend to feel uneasy: when it comes to survival, everyone is the Most Selfish Individual. We cannot help thinking that Question B matters very much.
    The answer that I choose is: it does not matter. I can accept as a continuation of my current identity any conscious being who thinks that he is a continuation of my current identity. I could not go to sleep if I could not accept this.

    Brett:
    > Because I don't *know* enough about how my consciousness
    > and the experience of self-hood manifests to assume that it can
    > persist completely decoupled from a matter substrate for any
    > length of time. My current thinking is no substrate means no
    > conscious processing (or unconscious processing either). No
    > consciousness process means no self concept process. In short
    > I assume that no brain means a discontinuation of me because it
    > seems prudent to do so.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 30 2003 - 03:26:21 MDT