[rescue] consciousness immortality
g at cjwyche.org
Fri Aug 26 23:10:50 CDT 2011
You might find reading David Brin's "Kiln People" a fun read since this
topic is the center piece of the book.
> [redirecting to geeks]
> " From: Mouse <mouse at Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
> " >> Though seriously, I consider it within the bounds of possibility
> " >> that, assuming we do not suffer a civilization crash, by the time my
> " >> physical body's ability to sustain me is exhausted, we will have the
> " >> capability to opt for upload into zettabyte space.
> " > what bothers me about that is, it's like email - only a -copy- of the
> " > -original-, which still dies.
> " In a sense. But in some sense, we're all dying all the time.
> we're also all regenerating all the time - that's what stem cells are
> btw, the number of times a stem cell can divide varies across species,
> but there seems to be an upper bound that none surpass. it's called
> the hayflick limit, after the dr. who discovered it. for humans, it
> would represent an age of about 2 centuries. and no, that doesn't
> mean living with a slowed-down metabolism like a turtle.
> " It's continuity of sense-of-self, which mostly means continuity of
> " memory, that I care about. If my mind can be moved to a silicon
> " substrate, I wouldn't care about the meat substrate I left behind any
> " more than I care about the way my current body's cells keep dying all
> " the time now.
> well, any number of copies would have the same sense-of-self as you the
> original do, if they're faithful, accurate, and complete. they still
> wouldn't be -you- the original, just clones.
> " > the fate of me - the original - isn't changed just b/c the -copy-
> " > lives forever.
> " But what is "me"? We don't yet know what "me" will be when - if - that
> " sort of thing becomes possible.
> anything which is conscious and self-aware can call itself 'me'. but
> the best -copy- is no more than a -clone- of -me-.
> " > nor does it matter if 3rd parties can't tell the difference between
> " > us - i can.
> " Can you? Maybe you won't be able to.
> i'll have the advantage of viewpoint. i may not be able to prove i'm
> either the original or a copy, but in that situation i'd be pretty
> sure there were 2 of us, not 1.
> " We don't yet know. For all we
> " know, it may turn out that during the time that both the CHON you and
> " the silicon you exist, they will share a single mind.
> unity is a promising concept, but -- here's a nightmare for ya:
> suppose that, after years of happy fusion, one day the organic part
> of you dies -- and the silicon part of you discovers that there was
> something you were able to do before which you now can't, and you
> can't even remember exactly what it was...
> Andrew Hay the genius nature
> internet rambler is to see what all have seen
> adh at an.bradford.ma.us and think what none thought
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
More information about the rescue