• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 years ago

    Whether that’s the case or not really depends on the process. For example, imagine if you could replace individual neurons with artificial ones while you were still conscious. You wouldn’t notice losing a single neuron, and if you replaced all the neurons over time, then by the end of the process you will have transferred your consciousness to a new substrate. Obviously, that isn’t a practical approach. However, it shows that this is possible to do in principle.

    A more realistic option would be to integrate an artificial system into the corpus callosum. Our brain is already split into two independent hemispheres that communicate over this channel. So, you could have the new hemisphere integrate with it, and map out one of the original hemispheres to the point where it’s able to mirror it. Then you could swap out each part of the brain in turn with an artificial version.

    • AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      I feel like brain backup technology is still in the realm of sci-fi right now and it’s too early to say what can and can’t work and what could silently kill you and create a replica of you. We also have no idea how consciousness works.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 years ago

        We obviously don’t have the technology to do this right now, but we can make thought experiments about it. While we don’t fully understand consciousness, that’s not the same as saying we have no idea at all about the nature of consciousness. Fundamentally, any procedure where you remain conscious throughout is not creating a replica since there is no disruption in the conscious process.

    • abbenm@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 years ago

      You can, and this is a great point. However (1) I think most of the time these hypotheticals get discussed, this is never contemplated or clarified at all, and generally people are just talking about copies rather than transfer of a single continuous identified.

      And (2), if we’re really cracking this open, we may have to confront the idea that this kind of transfer is already happening all the time biologically. And we may have to accept that there isn’t a single entity preserved across time. And if we really, really, really dig, it’s not just about physical substrate, it’s how much of yourself you lose to lost memories. And I think we have to take the passage of time seriously, and note that past instances of you are lost, in a sense. It’s like Derek Parfit’s quote about the glass tunnel, essentially.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 years ago

        Right, we’re constantly changing over time and we’re not the same person we were in the past. We have the notion of continuity and persistent identity over time, but it’s just a mental construct.

        Another interesting aspect is that we’re technically hive minds since each hemisphere can support a human consciousness all on its own. This is a great article on the subject.

        • abbenm@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          You know, on re-reading my comment I thought I was digressing too much and was going to lose people. But you actually picked up the ball and advanced it farther down the field. Well done! I am new to this idea that we are (or are possibly?) hiveminds already, so I’ll take a look at the article.

          Also I had a related thought: suppose, like @AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml, we have a concern about whether or not we were “really” copied. In some far-off-future where We Have The Technology, perhaps before fully “transferring” a person, you could wake them up in a state where they are simultaneously present in their own body, and in whatever medium they are being copied to. Then, when satisfied, such a person can “approve” their complete transfer, satisfied that their stream of consciousness would be sustained without disconnection, on whatever their new medium is. Although it would be super trippy to experience having two bodies, or two streams of thought (or whatever) at the same time during the intermediary phase.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 years ago

            Right, I think the continuation of consciousness is key to knowing that you’re not a copy. If the process is done in such a way where you remain conscious throughout then you know that you’re a continuation of the same process. Learning to be me is a fun short story exploring this idea as well.

            Also worth considering that a separate physical body isn’t the only way a mind could be extended. For example, artificial parts of the brain could integrate with virtual reality or the internet in general. So, it doesn’t need to even be a physical copy just your mind expanding into new domains that were inaccessible before. The whole idea of having a single body could become obsolete. And it’s reasonable to imagine our minds could adapt to this seeing how we experience similar thing when we play video games. We see our character as a third person avatar we control in many games, and the experience can feel quite immersive.