What if we could transfer our conscious into a computer?

Post Reply New Topic

Well it is sci-fi, just watch The 13th Floor or the show Caprica, though it sort of sucks since there's only one season I was rather sad about that. But either way I don't see why it wouldn't be possible.

^^^Yeah... I really liked Caprica's take on AIs.... Too bad SyFy is run by douchebags.

Last edited by GoonSquad on 15 Jan 2013, 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

No one is seriously suggesting this is the case.



There is not the need to simulate the brain all the way down to molecular level, however I can entertain you argument. Henry Markram's Blue Brain Project has been quite impressive to date. In 2005 he successfully simulated a single neuron, in 2008 the entire neocortical column of a rat brain and in 2011 up to 100 times that totaling a million cells. He estimates to complete the simulation of a human brain by 2023. Granted this is only the framework and the real hurdles are in fact in the scanning. Noninvasive scanning techniques of a high enough resolution are not likely to be a reality before 2040 according to Ray Kurzweil's estimates, however this may not be necessary. It is quite likely that the majority of us will have integrated synthetic intelligence well before then and would be able to interface with machines directly.



This is pure conjecture. Consciousness is a purely subjective experience and can not be pinned down so easily. What evidence do you have that consciousness is not simply an inherent byproduct of a sufficiently complex system? Whats to say that you are you every morning when you wake up and not simply a copy of the consciousness of the previous you? If I could, hypothetically of course, replace every cell in your body one at a time with an exact artificial copy, then at what point would you stop being you? I don't think consciousness and what it is to be you is anywhere near as concrete or black and white as you seem to think.



This is ridiculous. While it is true that your biological brain requires a certain amount of the body function, there is no reason at all why an artificial brain would have this same requirement.

Oh man, Caprica had the potential to be a great show. It was especially frustrating how they made the little teaser about all the awesome stuff "coming up in season 2" and then, nope! j/k no more toasters for you!

Caprica was nowhere near as good as Battlestar Gallactica

ruveyn

If I remenber right this "simulation" was not a system capable of changing like a real biological system would. All you got is a still picture, fixed in time.


You didn't understood me, the "copy" of course would have a conscience, but this is not the conscience of the "original". The "original" would remain in the real world. It's not because two things are identical that they the same.


If you don't give the brain a body all it can it do is float in the void. The brain need a body to interact with reality, it would need a body to interact with a virtual world too. Smell, touch, vision, taste, earing, proprioception, etc... They all percieved trough the body, without it you'll have nothing to interact with and you will become crazy.
Speaking of body, you'll need a virtual world for his interaction. Building "The matrix" is not as easy as some make it sound. Each generation of consoles see a rise of the costs to making video games, which now come with scheme to siphon customers money because they desesperate. The next generation will propably see a lot of bankrout among the major developpers in the world of video games, and the worlds they create are still far from be convincing enough for virtual reality. Because making convinvcing world need a lot of ressources and moneys, not just powerfull hardware.

This is probably the most do-able part of the whole project. We don't know how to copy or even plausibly simulate a human brain. But we have figured out how to get sensory data into computers. Visual and auditory feeds would be the easiest part of the whole operation. The computer could also be given something like a robot body with pressure and tempurature sensors to simulate interaction of the body with the outside world.

However, having done all that, it still isn't "you". As you also said, the original person doesn't stop having their own thoughts just because a copy has been put into a computer. Instead there is you in a human body and a copy with the same memories and thought patterns. But there isn't any connection between the two. Instead there are now two separate beings who have a past in common.

if someone deleted you would it be equal to murder?

I like the way everybody simply accepts that consciousness resides only in the brain, not the heart, the muscles or the body as a whole.

If I shaved off one eyebrow, it will grow back. It wont keep growing and growing like head hair. It just grows back to a pre-determined length.
My question is, how does the eyebrow know it has been shaved off?
Does this demonstrate the inherent intelligence of the eyebrow?

Head hair doesn't just keep growing and growing. It grows to a pre-determined length, like hair anywhere on the body, then it falls out. All hair grows to a predetermined length then falls out. The difference is that for hair follicles in different parts of the body the predetermined length is different. The eyebrow doesn't suddenly start growing just because it was shaved off. It was growing the whole time previous and individual hairs were falling out. Since the hairs fall out at different times rather than simultaneously there is an illusion of not growing at all once a certain length is reached and only growing if shaved off. But that's an illusion.

But back to your original point....yes perhaps consciousness is dispersed throughout the body. Maybe the term "I have a gut feeling" is literal. My own sense is that it is centralized in the brain but that other parts of the body are outposts. I don't think it's an even dispersion (because of how the brain is composed) but I do think there are elements of consciousness unevenly dispersed elsewhere. Tollorin did bring up how a brain in a vat is unsustainable since the body really is needed. I replied that sensory input can come from mechanical feeds (such as cameras) but it may also be that a brain in a vat cut off from a body is also cut off from part of its' consciousness, not merely sensory input.

Thank you, that one had me guessing for a long long time, I believe you are correct.

I do have another question, when the spinal cord is completely severed as in the case of some quadriplegics, the signals to keep the internal organs operating normally continue to be sent and received.
How can this be when the nervous conduit to the brain, the spinal cord, is completely cut?

Well, not all of the nerves go through the spinal cord. I think, the nerves to the arm muscles are like this aren't they? Not sure about the organs though.

Prehaps, as said above the conscious is not localised in the brain. But why do we assume it 'sits' in the brain. Is it because that is where our vison and hearing is, so we 'feel' like we, the conscious, is in the brain.

Argh! I had a perfectly good post for this subject earlier and now it just crumbles away! thank you pathatic memory.

We would need to replicate the sensory organs to provide it with input, otherwise it would not be conscious of anything.

I don't see any reason why a network of artificial connections could be made that replicate the human brain other than the complexity involved. We are not even scratching the surface with current AI; I think we are just looking in that direction.

Yes. In a way.

ruveyn

I understand what you are saying, I simply disagree. I do not think consciousness is single, concrete, monolithic thing. I do not think it is a matter of the "original" and a "copy"; I don't think there is an "original" as you are imagining. There are breaks in consciousness, it is not a perpetual uninterrupted thing. I think it is far more likely that consciousness is a fleeting thing, only existing in the moment, only experiencing what is playing out after the "reign" of the previous moments consciousness. In this way you do not have a "copy" and an "original" but in fact a fork in the stream of conscious moments, with each new independent, unique consciousnesses equally as much you.




A digital "copy" of your brain could be plugged into the internet of today and experience the world wide web like none of us could imagine. The mind is a very plastic and adaptable thing. I think however you getting caught up on a minor detail. How many people today spend more time in non-immersive simulated worlds such as Second Life than they do out in the real world? You really think that 15-20 years from now there will not be alternative worlds of sufficient resolution to satisfy a sizable chunk of the population? You have a very closed-minded perspective on this.





If I were to remove non vital pieces of your body one at a time, say for example your arm, your consciousnesses will stay with you, with your mind. You would not be aware of the arms surroundings and therefore it is separate. If you have a heart transplant you do not lose part of your consciousness nor blend with the consciousness of donor. I do not discount the possibility, however, that the arm or the heart has consciousness but if it does it is a separate one. You are not aware of all of the inner workings of your body, only those that are transmitted to the brain, so reason dictates that if those parts are conscious, it is not your consciousness. The consciousness you experience day to day is the consciousness of your mind, of your brain, and nothing more.