130 replies to this topic

[Heliotrope]

Eternal mind, as flesh is fallible. I'd prefer whatever has the best chance of lasting longest, I think that would be full technology immersion.

Everything: electronic, mechanical, biological has a chance of failing. Only way to get around this is through redundancy.

PURE ENERGY/ spirit if possible , or spread myself around, as long as it's physical, it can be destroyed

[forever freedom]

Eternal mind, as flesh is fallible. I'd prefer whatever has the best chance of lasting longest, I think that would be full technology immersion.

Everything: electronic, mechanical, biological has a chance of failing. Only way to get around this is through redundancy.

"eternal mind", considering that we won't "lose consciousness" once uploaded, has a much lesser chance of failing than any other option in this poll, so that should be the most rational pick.

[mikeinnaples]

Unless the act of eternal mind is destruction of your true self and converting yourself to a copy. To me that is irrational until it is fully understood. The simple fact that your 'rationalization' could be your destruction should be enough for a 'rational' person not to take that as thier optimal choice until the point and time that it can be proven that the upload is more than an empty copy. If you can prove that the true essence of what makes you 'you' would be transfered and that it would be free from manipulation or assimilation for eternity, then it would be rational. There is also no point in preserving your mind if your mind loses its individuality .....the price of immortality is too steep to pay if you lose who you are. There is so much at play here to simply call something 'rational' and be done with it.

The only true rational thing here is to preserve life, abolish death, and provide for individual choice regarding preservation (and eventually an individuals choice to cease existance).

[Heliotrope]

Unless the act of eternal mind is destruction of your true self and converting yourself to a copy. To me that is irrational until it is fully understood. The simple fact that your 'rationalization' could be your destruction should be enough for a 'rational' person not to take that as thier optimal choice until the point and time that it can be proven that the upload is more than an empty copy. If you can prove that the true essence of what makes you 'you' would be transfered and that it would be free from manipulation or assimilation for eternity, then it would be rational. There is also no point in preserving your mind if your mind loses its individuality .....the price of immortality is too steep to pay if you lose who you are. There is so much at play here to simply call something 'rational' and be done with it.

The only true rational thing here is to preserve life, abolish death, and provide for individual choice regarding preservation (and eventually an individuals choice to cease existance).

eternal mind has many potential probs, for the forseeable future, go with more proven technologies, we can barely conceive the techs that go into building the eternal mind, then if it works, it may not be the true self, eternal, or just a nightmarish entrapment. Still, something beyond mere physical organic matter is what can last long. build a god-like existence in which we can take any form would be good, pure " spirit"

Edited by HYP86, 07 May 2008 - 05:23 PM.

[Cyberbrain]

Just my two cents:

The whole purpose of personal survival and the reason why most people here want immortality is to ensure the preservation and continuation of one's individualistic consciousness. The body is just a machine, in that it's only one way of ensuring the survival of the mind. At first I would want to go cyborg then full prosthetics. Finally when the technology has been perfected I too will want to go eternal mind. Afterwards I would prefer to have a body made out of pure energy and then to become a pan dimensional being. Finally I would like to reach the level of a Type IV civilization or the level that God theoretically exists in.

[Heliotrope]

Just my two cents:

The whole purpose of personal survival and the reason why most people here want immortality is to ensure the preservation and continuation of one's individualistic consciousness. The body is just a machine, in that it's only one way of ensuring the survival of the mind. At first I would want to go cyborg then full prosthetics. Finally when the technology has been perfected I too will want to go eternal mind. Afterwards I would prefer to have a body made out of pure energy and then to become a pan dimensional being. Finally I would like to reach the level of a Type IV civilization or the level that God theoretically exists in.

right on. i believe god may exist, but we'll have to work at getting to god. when we are technologically advanced enough, god will be there! or at least, then we become gods

[Cyberbrain]

I like this quote:

"We can only engineer our freedom from death, not pray for it ... having invented the gods we can turn into them" - Alan Harrington

[mitkat]

I chose cyborg, seems the most 'practical' of the bunch, as there are many examples of this type of technology existing today. This option seems most reasonable at this current time imo. I'll cross any other bridges when and if I come to them, that's enough futuristic navel gazing for me

[John_Ventureville]

mikeinnaples wrote:
Unless the act of eternal mind is destruction of your true self and converting yourself to a copy. To me that is irrational until it is fully understood. The simple fact that your 'rationalization' could be your destruction should be enough for a 'rational' person not to take that as thier optimal choice until the point and time that it can be proven that the upload is more than an empty copy. If you can prove that the true essence of what makes you 'you' would be transfered and that it would be free from manipulation or assimilation for eternity, then it would be rational. There is also no point in preserving your mind if your mind loses its individuality .....the price of immortality is too steep to pay if you lose who you are. There is so much at play here to simply call something 'rational' and be done with it.
>>>

There have been nearly countless threads discussing whether a perfect copy of your mind/body is still truly *you." I would consider such a copy my mind clone or "mind child." But I still find such a thing comforting.

"Fitting in and being successful" is going to be a big deal in the future, just as it is today. And so for a time being a very enhanced human body-type will be seen as impressive, or at least good enough. But over time it will be viewed as backward as more and more human minds ascend to more powerful forms.

I like the idea of being a pure energy/eternal mind along the lines of V'ger, from Star Trek. And such a being would definitely be from a post-Singularity civilization! lol But I would go easy on any troublesome Klingons who came to visit me...

John

[stargazer]

I'd probably choose methuselah/gattaca for now. There's too many layers to just being human that I havn't explored yet for me to enhance myself radically in the near-term. I will enjoy being "just" human for a long time before turning myself into something wholly artificial. Life is special that way, we can't experience things in retrospect, today is today and can't be relived ever. Spending the night with whom you love is not the same experience as doing it tomorrow. Some may argue that being transhuman only makes life more enjoyable and is no conflict to whatever happiness you can gain as a regular human. While I agree to that I object to it being equal but just more. It's different and since I havn't lived to the fullest as a regular human I will wait until I've done so. Living life today is not the same thing as reliving it as a simulation in the future. I want to experience as much as I can of existance, flaws and suffering too.

Contrary to some of you I wish not to become a god, a creator of a universe and potentially its inhabitants. I think that's the ultimate perversion and mockery of life. To make individuals part of one's own personal game is horrendously offensive, every moment of suffering will be by your hands, every negative thing that ever existed in that universe will be because of you. I'll gladly help create life, equals, in this universe but I will not in any way be involved in creating beings under my direct control whos' fates get determined at my personal whim. Is life just a game to you people?

Edited by stargazer, 18 May 2008 - 11:28 PM.

[FieldMarshal]

Methuselah is the first and formost priority. Gattaca would be great insofar as to suit my needs. After a couple thousand years, I'll go on to prosethetics. When the sun becomes to hot for the earth and its surrounding space systems to endure, we will move out of the solar system and create our own planets and space systems a billion years from now. When the heat death of the universe starts 100 trillion years from now and all stars burn out into dwarfs, we'll have no choice but to create our own multiverses with eternal Mind. Ultaimtely, we will create our own, permanate, reality that is dynamic, happy and eternally sustainable. We will all be in heaven.

[Zoroaster]

Cyborg definitely. Never eternal mind! No matter how strong the peer pressure is. I can't imagine it would maintain a continuity of existence. If your conciousness is just a series of ones and zeros then when there are two copies, which one is you? Two copies enter two different bodies and which one are you in? Both? Just because they're copies doesn't mean you'd have some kind of bizarre dual conciousness going on. Why would you have a dual conciousness? You'd be "in" one of them. And when that one died or was erased you'd be dead while your twin lived on. A copy is not you.

And even if other people did it and said it was great you couldn't trust them! If your friend made a copy of himself and then his body died, speaking to that copy would be exactly like speaking to your friend as if he hadn't died. But its not the same conciousness. Its a new conciousness made with the memories of the old one pre-installed. When your friend's original conciousness was erased he ceased to exist and now perceives nothing. He's not the one telling you to hop on in. That new conciousness thinks that its your friend who has now been successfully transfered to an electronic form, but how does it know it really is? It wouldn't be able to tell the difference and neither would you.

I would actually think religious people would have an easier time accepting the eternal mind. Because they can envison an ethereal soul that could float on over and attach themselves to some other electronic mind. If you have several copies of your mind on file and your current mind dies then what do you think happens? Your conciousness just floats on over to another copy? How could that possibly work?

That's the same reason why I'd never get in a teleporter (the kind that would deconstruct you and reconstruct you in a new location). No matter how mainstream they became. I'd rather be the crotchety old-timer that everyone thinks is a ludite than dead.

[lunarsolarpower]

If your conciousness is just a series of ones and zeros then when there are two copies, which one is you?

Ever heard of a RAID array? Combine that sort of thing with wireless networking and "you" could simultaneously be in both. Here's a question for you: what make up "you" is it hardware or software? If you say hardware consider that every atom in your body cycles out over a several year period of time. If you say software, remember that software can be infinitely copied and easily mirrored.

[Heliotrope]

If your conciousness is just a series of ones and zeros then when there are two copies, which one is you?

Ever heard of a RAID array? Combine that sort of thing with wireless networking and "you" could simultaneously be in both. Here's a question for you: what make up "you" is it hardware or software? If you say hardware consider that every atom in your body cycles out over a several year period of time. If you say software, remember that software can be infinitely copied and easily mirrored.

Hey where did you hear that Every single atom in your body cycles out over several years? your entire hardwire body gets completely replaced atom by atom on the atomic level? that's gotta be a trillion gazilllion bazzillion atoms

i heard our skin and some other organs may get completely replaced every seven years , but the whole body? even every atom in our brain, our heart, , and genitals/reproductive organs ???

gimme a serious source , scientific reference etc

Edited by HYP86, 19 May 2008 - 04:50 AM.

[VictorBjoerk]

The prospect of a eternal mind is quite frightening.....

[Zoroaster]

If your conciousness is just a series of ones and zeros then when there are two copies, which one is you?

Ever heard of a RAID array? Combine that sort of thing with wireless networking and "you" could simultaneously be in both. Here's a question for you: what make up "you" is it hardware or software? If you say hardware consider that every atom in your body cycles out over a several year period of time. If you say software, remember that software can be infinitely copied and easily mirrored.

Actually I doubt that the atoms of your neurons are all cycled out, but its really irrelevant. Connections are made between neurons not individual atoms of those neurons. And don't you think its interesting that your neurons are not replicated under normal circumstances? Its an unusual characteristic for a cell and I'm sure evolution provided that characteristic for a reason. I think there's ample reason to believe that the software is not "me". My neuronal connections are constantly being modified and reformed. As I learn and grow the "software" changes yet I remain me through all these changes. No, I don't think its the software that makes me me.

And the idea that, if there were multiple copies of your mind, "you" could be both seems like a fancifull assumption. A program in a raid array is not analogous to a conciousness. How would "you" be both? What would that be like? There is no reason to believe your conciousness would all of a sudden be in two places at once just because a copy of your brain was created on the other side of the world. That's getting pretty mystical. Like you have some existence outside the physical world that is magically connected to any copy of a particular series of ones and zeros. Its an interesting belief but I don't have that kind of faith.

[Cyberbrain]

If your consciousness is just a series of ones and zeros then when there are two copies, which one is you?

Ever heard of a RAID array? Combine that sort of thing with wireless networking and "you" could simultaneously be in both. Here's a question for you: what make up "you" is it hardware or software? If you say hardware consider that every atom in your body cycles out over a several year period of time. If you say software, remember that software can be infinitely copied and easily mirrored.

Thats the smartest thing I have ever heard

I always believed that we must also take into account the fact that even now in our current bodies, we are a completely new person and the person that existed, say, ten years ago is now dead. In other words, as we grow older through time our bodies are being replenished with nutrients, vitamins, oxygen and so forth. Cells in our bodies are constantly dividing. Constantly being created and destroyed. Our bodies are a very dynamic system. Like the saying goes, we are what we eat. Over time the molecules and atoms that make up our cells are constantly being replaced with new ones. Our entire molecular make up is entirely different now than it was ten years ago. We don’t have the exact same cells and atoms that were in us back then. We are essentially, in my view, completely different people now.

I also believe that consciousness is a mechanism derived directly from the brain, much in the same way artificial intelligence is derived from computers. It is a process; a continuing mechanistic process of electrical signals and chemical reactions. Therefore, all we really need to do is continue this unique mechanistic process in order to maintain consciousness. So one presumption I have is that we wouldn't need to duplicate our brain atom-per-atom in order to insure we have maintained the original consciousness because there is no such thing as an original consciousness. Our consciousness is a process whose algorithm is partly defined by our subjective experiences and partly defined by our genetic and cellular make up. Using this reasoning I don’t believe consciousness carrys with it any identity unless if it is subjected to experiences and memories. Therefore, with the exact science and technology it would be theoretically possible to upload your mind and maintain your original mind.

[Heliotrope]

The prospect of a eternal mind is quite frightening.....

why? it'd be the closest thing to eternity and true immortality

[cyborgdreamer]

I chose eternal mind but only after we understand the nature of consciousness enough prove that I would still be me

To make individuals part of one's own personal game is horrendously offensive, every moment of suffering will be by your hands, every negative thing that ever existed in that universe will be because of you. I'll gladly help create life, equals, in this universe but I will not in any way be involved in creating beings under my direct control whos' fates get determined at my personal whim.

I completely agree. Just because you create a being doesn't mean you have the right to let them suffer and die. I'd only create a universe like that if the virtual beings weren't actually conscious.

[Zoroaster]

I chose eternal mind but only after we understand the nature of consciousness enough prove that I would still be me

It can never be proven. That's the problem. Its not a limit of technology or knowledge its a limit of reality. There is no way to prove that you will maintain continuity of existence when transfered to a machine. It will be risky as hell no matter how advanced we are and no matter how many people do it "successfully" before you. This has been addressed by several modern philosophers.


Please, somebody whose into the "eternal mind" answer these questions for me:

Once a copy of your mind is successfully made on a computer what happens to your conciousness? Do you instantly become a dual conciousness? Say an electronic copy is made on a server in India and your biological body is here in the US. Do you all of a sudden perk up and perceive yourself in two places? If so why would that happen?

And then what would happen when your body is killed? Would you just magically transfer to this other mind? And if you claim your mind would be transfered (and biological body killed) while the copy is simultaneously created, this is really just the same situation happening in rapid succession so the answer should be the same.

And finally, since we're using the argument that the mind must not be necessary for conciousness since it's continually changing, what about the "Software" so to speak: the neural network. Its continually changing as well. With every new experience, every second of every day you are a different person. So if change disqualifies the physical body as a necessary component of conciousness then wouldn't it also disqualify the neural network? Could you even keep multiple copies of a mind on seperate servers? Because their varying experiences from being in different places would change their neural networks and make them different conciousnesses the instant after they were created.


No offense (seriously) but the idea that multiple copies of a mind are one and the same person seems a little like people who believe if they were to birth a clone of themselves it would be a weird, evil, mentally connected little child. Or those people who believe twins somehow have a mystical tie. A copy is not you. But I would love for someone to convince me that it is. Because that would be really comforting actually.

[cyborgdreamer]

I chose eternal mind but only after we understand the nature of consciousness enough prove that I would still be me

It can never be proven. That's the problem. Its not a limit of technology or knowledge its a limit of reality. There is no way to prove that you will maintain continuity of existence when transfered to a machine. It will be risky as hell no matter how advanced we are and no matter how many people do it "successfully" before you. This has been addressed by several modern philosophers.

If we study the brain enough, we may be able to figure out why it is conscious.

Please, somebody whose into the "eternal mind" answer these questions for me:

Once a copy of your mind is successfully made on a computer what happens to your conciousness? Do you instantly become a dual conciousness? Say an electronic copy is made on a server in India and your biological body is here in the US. Do you all of a sudden perk up and perceive yourself in two places? If so why would that happen?

And then what would happen when your body is killed? Would you just magically transfer to this other mind? And if you claim your mind would be transfered (and biological body killed) while the copy is simultaneously created, this is really just the same situation happening in rapid succession so the answer should be the same.

And finally, since we're using the argument that the mind must not be necessary for conciousness since it's continually changing, what about the "Software" so to speak: the neural network. Its continually changing as well. With every new experience, every second of every day you are a different person. So if change disqualifies the physical body as a necessary component of conciousness then wouldn't it also disqualify the neural network? Could you even keep multiple copies of a mind on seperate servers? Because their varying experiences from being in different places would change their neural networks and make them different conciousnesses the instant after they were created.


No offense (seriously) but the idea that multiple copies of a mind are one and the same person seems a little like people who believe if they were to birth a clone of themselves it would be a weird, evil, mentally connected little child. Or those people who believe twins somehow have a mystical tie. A copy is not you. But I would love for someone to convince me that it is. Because that would be really comforting actually.

You seem to think that consciousness is fundamentally unique to an individual and consistant over time (a bit like a soul). Those of us who favor the 'eternal mind' scenario think that there is no difference between 'my consciousness' and 'your consciousness' except for the things we are conscious of. I'm me because I'm a concious being who has my memories, knowledge, and personality. Therefore, another mind with these properties would still be me. If there were two of them at the same time, they'd diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having separate experiances. There are no dual-consciousnesses or psychic powers involved. Just two people with a lot of shared memories who have equal claim to calling themselves 'Cyborgdreamer'.

[Zoroaster]

If we study the brain enough, we may be able to figure out why it is conscious.

I don't think its a matter of figuring out why the brain is conscious. Read my previous post on this subject. If someone else were to transfer their mind to an electronic grid (and in the process kill their physical body) that conciousness on the grid would believe it was your friend who had successfully transfered over. But there is absolutely no way to know whether your original friend has perceived it that way or whether he has just ceased to exist while an exactly similar new conciousness has been created with his memories preinstalled. Do you see what I mean? It will be impossible to know whether or not such a proceedure would lead to immortality or oblivion until you yourself took the plunge. This is why I say it will always be risky as hell. Its not a problem of understanding the brain its a matter of continuity of existence being an Ontologically Subjective phenomenon, meaning it is impossible (even theoretically) to know whether or not you will continue to exist until you have experienced it yourself. Has anyone read John Searle on this issue? He is probably the foremost modern philosopher on the issue of conciousness and he has addressed this extensively.

You seem to think that consciousness is fundamentally unique to an individual and consistant over time (a bit like a soul). Those of us who favor the 'eternal mind' scenario think that there is no difference between 'my consciousness' and 'your consciousness' except for the things we are conscious of. I'm me because I'm a concious being who has my memories, knowledge, and personality. Therefore, another mind with these properties would still be me. If there were two of them at the same time, they'd diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having separate experiances. There are no dual-consciousnesses or psychic powers involved. Just two people with a lot of shared memories who have equal claim to calling themselves 'Cyborgdreamer'.

If I have given you the impression that I believe in a soul then I must not have been clear, but I do suspect that conciousness is unique to an individaul and bound to a body because I have so far seen no evidence to the contrary. And the idea that conciousness can be transferred is riddled with philosophical problems, the most basic of which are embodied in the questions I wrote in my last post. If anyone could please answer those questions for me then I feel like I would have a better understanding of where the "eternal mind" people are coming from.

Honestly I have found your explanation even more confusing. You seem to have confirmed some of my issues with the eternal mind, such as the fact that two copies of a mind would diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having different experiences. Well wouldn't they start having different experiences the second after they were created? So how is "making back-up copies" of your mind even possible? And while you say that there are "no dual-consciousnesses", dual-consciousnesses seem to be exactly what a lot of eternal mind people expect. In fact I think the existence of dual-conciousnesses is a critical element of the "eternal mind" theory. Without it how is the transfer made? And finally "two people with a lot of shared memories" doesn't mean they are the same person. My wife and I have a lot of shared memories but we each have our own distinct consciousness. If I die I will not perceive that I continue to live on because my wife is still alive. Neither would you perceive anything after death simply because there still existed a copy of you with "a lot of shared memories". That is not immortality.

Look its really not about having "your consciousness" continue to exist forever. At least not if we use your definition of a conscioussness which seems to be anything with a particular set of "memories, knowledge, and personality". Immortality is about maintaining an unbroken sense of continuity of existence. That may or may not be necessarily connected with what you are referring to as a "consciousness" but when I say "conscioussness" that's what I'm talking about. To me, that is "me". This feeling of self-awareness. There are plenty of simple thought experiments and even some real world examples that can confirm that two beings with the same "memories, knowledge, and personality" likely do not have the same sense of self. So when one dies they still go into oblivion while the other lives on.

I really think this needs to be thought out in a little more philosophical detail here. Or at least I need someone to explain it to me in a little more detail. I need the nitty-gritty if I'm going to accept this possibility. Right now it just seems like a lot of vagaries and inflated hope in the powers of technology. Its almost a religious faith people seem to have that somehow its going to work out. Look "eternal mind" people. I want to believe. "Help thou mine unbelief"!

[cyborgdreamer]

If we study the brain enough, we may be able to figure out why it is conscious.

I don't think its a matter of figuring out why the brain is conscious. Read my previous post on this subject. If someone else were to transfer their mind to an electronic grid (and in the process kill their physical body) that conciousness on the grid would believe it was your friend who had successfully transfered over. But there is absolutely no way to know whether your original friend has perceived it that way or whether he has just ceased to exist while an exactly similar new conciousness has been created with his memories preinstalled. Do you see what I mean? It will be impossible to know whether or not such a proceedure would lead to immortality or oblivion until you yourself took the plunge. This is why I say it will always be risky as hell. Its not a problem of understanding the brain its a matter of continuity of existence being an Ontologically Subjective phenomenon, meaning it is impossible (even theoretically) to know whether or not you will continue to exist until you have experienced it yourself. Has anyone read John Searle on this issue? He is probably the foremost modern philosopher on the issue of conciousness and he has addressed this extensively.

I'm more inclined toward Daniel Dennett's argument that consciousness is a function of the objective properties of the brain. Thus, if you understood the firings of every neuron in someone's brain, you would know what they were experiancing.

You seem to think that consciousness is fundamentally unique to an individual and consistant over time (a bit like a soul). Those of us who favor the 'eternal mind' scenario think that there is no difference between 'my consciousness' and 'your consciousness' except for the things we are conscious of. I'm me because I'm a concious being who has my memories, knowledge, and personality. Therefore, another mind with these properties would still be me. If there were two of them at the same time, they'd diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having separate experiances. There are no dual-consciousnesses or psychic powers involved. Just two people with a lot of shared memories who have equal claim to calling themselves 'Cyborgdreamer'.

If I have given you the impression that I believe in a soul then I must not have been clear, but I do suspect that conciousness is unique to an individaul and bound to a body because I have so far seen no evidence to the contrary. And the idea that conciousness can be transferred is riddled with philosophical problems, the most basic of which are embodied in the questions I wrote in my last post. If anyone could please answer those questions for me then I feel like I would have a better understanding of where the "eternal mind" people are coming from.

Honestly I have found your explanation even more confusing. You seem to have confirmed some of my issues with the eternal mind, such as the fact that two copies of a mind would diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having different experiences. Well wouldn't they start having different experiences the second after they were created? So how is "making back-up copies" of your mind even possible? And while you say that there are "no dual-consciousnesses", dual-consciousnesses seem to be exactly what a lot of eternal mind people expect. In fact I think the existence of dual-conciousnesses is a critical element of the "eternal mind" theory. Without it how is the transfer made? And finally "two people with a lot of shared memories" doesn't mean they are the same person. My wife and I have a lot of shared memories but we each have our own distinct consciousness. If I die I will not perceive that I continue to live on because my wife is still alive. Neither would you perceive anything after death simply because there still existed a copy of you with "a lot of shared memories". That is not immortality.

Look its really not about having "your consciousness" continue to exist forever. At least not if we use your definition of a conscioussness which seems to be anything with a particular set of "memories, knowledge, and personality". Immortality is about maintaining an unbroken sense of continuity of existence. That may or may not be necessarily connected with what you are referring to as a "consciousness" but when I say "conscioussness" that's what I'm talking about. To me, that is "me". This feeling of self-awareness. There are plenty of simple thought experiments and even some real world examples that can confirm that two beings with the same "memories, knowledge, and personality" likely do not have the same sense of self. So when one dies they still go into oblivion while the other lives on.

I really think this needs to be thought out in a little more philosophical detail here. Or at least I need someone to explain it to me in a little more detail. I need the nitty-gritty if I'm going to accept this possibility. Right now it just seems like a lot of vagaries and inflated hope in the powers of technology. Its almost a religious faith people seem to have that somehow its going to work out. Look "eternal mind" people. I want to believe. "Help thou mine unbelief"!

I understand what you mean by consciousness but I guess I didn't explain myself clearly. What I'm trying to say is that there's no reason to think that we have an unbroken continuity of subjective existence. We feel that way because our memories, knowledge, and personality continue on. But that doesn't necessarily mean that our sense of subjectivity is connected from one moment to the next. So if we don't have this continuity, then the 'eternal mind' scenario only has to sustain a disjoint set of experiances connected by memories and personality traits.

[Heliotrope]

good debate, keep on.

[brokenportal]

two copies of a mind would diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having different experiences. Well wouldn't they start having different experiences the second after they were created? So how is "making back-up copies" of your mind even possible?

Ive never really thought about this ai and uploading stuff before but if you could back up your mind then if the running copy dies couldnt you go back and upload a paused copy? It would launch you back to the mind frame you were in at that time but it would be better than nothing right?

I havent voted yet, these are all interesting options. Ill have to think about them more.

[lunarsolarpower]

If I have given you the impression that I believe in a soul then I must not have been clear, but I do suspect that conciousness is unique to an individaul and bound to a body because I have so far seen no evidence to the contrary. And the idea that conciousness can be transferred is riddled with philosophical problems, the most basic of which are embodied in the questions I wrote in my last post. If anyone could please answer those questions for me then I feel like I would have a better understanding of where the "eternal mind" people are coming from.

Honestly I have found your explanation even more confusing. You seem to have confirmed some of my issues with the eternal mind, such as the fact that two copies of a mind would diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having different experiences. Well wouldn't they start having different experiences the second after they were created? So how is "making back-up copies" of your mind even possible? And while you say that there are "no dual-consciousnesses", dual-consciousnesses seem to be exactly what a lot of eternal mind people expect. In fact I think the existence of dual-conciousnesses is a critical element of the "eternal mind" theory. Without it how is the transfer made? And finally "two people with a lot of shared memories" doesn't mean they are the same person. My wife and I have a lot of shared memories but we each have our own distinct consciousness. If I die I will not perceive that I continue to live on because my wife is still alive. Neither would you perceive anything after death simply because there still existed a copy of you with "a lot of shared memories". That is not immortality.

Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID and specifically look at RAID 1. That is the simplest equivalent to what I'm talking about except imagine the mirrored drives are in two separate countries and are linked by a network.

Look its really not about having "your consciousness" continue to exist forever. At least not if we use your definition of a conscioussness which seems to be anything with a particular set of "memories, knowledge, and personality". Immortality is about maintaining an unbroken sense of continuity of existence. That may or may not be necessarily connected with what you are referring to as a "consciousness" but when I say "conscioussness" that's what I'm talking about. To me, that is "me". This feeling of self-awareness. There are plenty of simple thought experiments and even some real world examples that can confirm that two beings with the same "memories, knowledge, and personality" likely do not have the same sense of self. So when one dies they still go into oblivion while the other lives on.

I don't disagree with your points here but I have a few thoughts on how this can and must be done if the goals of those who gather here are to be met. Let's imagine the day has come when it is possible to run a high resolution MRI of a person's brain and upload their entire repertoire of memories, personality and individuality to a digital substrate (computer). You and I will agree that the digital copy might be neat but it's still not "them" in the continuity of consciousness definition. However let's imagine the technology advances a bit more and it becomes possible to hardwire a link via carbon nanotubes to each individual neuron of the human brain. At this point the computer would have instantaneous input that would let it keep the "copy" exactly up to date. If it allowed the copy to "run live" it might even have experiences and be able to update the wetware brain. However we're still not at the critical point. The critical point would come the day our wetware human decides his protein and myelin processor isn't going to cut it anymore. Perhaps he is diagnosed with early stage Alzheimer's. Alzheimers, in a guy who doesn't even like to sleep at night because of the loss of consciousness and control it entails. THIS is the critical point. The wetware brain was already effortlessly feeding information back and forth between itself and the digital side of things. The digital side is a complete copy and so "it" knows that it is conscious. The meatware knows that "it" is conscious. They both are fully synced. There is no differentiation of consciousness between the two. Both are taking in the same sensory input. The "consciousness" is fully merged. At that point a nanosurgical probe signals a region of the brain not involved in the sensation of "me-ness" to undergo apoptosis (controlled cell death). Let's choose the cerebellum which is involved in balance and coordination. This process is done for the benefit of the nervous presumptive uploadee. No sedation or anesthetic is involved as he is fiercely interested in making sure "he" does not disappear in the process. As the biological cerebellum atrophies away perhaps over the course of a couple hours the carbon nanotube connections take over signalling the body to maintain balance and sensory functions.

Our subject doesn't notice the difference so he gives the go-ahead for the next stage. The occipital lobe is next. It is largely concerned with processing sight and the digital processor is far advanced beyond it's abilities at this point of time so switching from biological control to the nanotubes only causes a slightly increase in visual processing ability. The process continues over the next several days. At each juncture the man digitizes a piece of his fading brain. However he ensures the process is ceased entirely while he sleeps at night. Finally all of the brain has been switched to digital control with the exception of the frontal lobe. The nanoelectrical apparatus is controlling the autonomic systems of the body, regulating heart rate and respiration. It is the sole repository of his memories. It is processing new sensory input and storing it to memory. The frontal lobe of the brain is the section that has been worried since the beginning about the risk of it's demise. However the parallel model of it in the computer is just as worried. After all, they are identical synapse for synapse, input for input, output for output.

Slowly, and with the knowledge that there is no other way to ensure his survival the man pushes the button causing the frontal lobe to undergo apoptosis.

Twenty minutes later it is done. The body has not moved. He lets out a deep breath. Alzheimer's cannot destroy him now. Indeed, if he keeps live synced copies of his consciousness in multiple locations on earth very little could. If he launches copies of his consciousness in various directions across the universe - all capable of reintegrating and joining into a single entity if they ever come into contact again - he will have achieved practical physical immortality. And, he'll never have to sleep again.

I really think this needs to be thought out in a little more philosophical detail here. Or at least I need someone to explain it to me in a little more detail. I need the nitty-gritty if I'm going to accept this possibility. Right now it just seems like a lot of vagaries and inflated hope in the powers of technology. Its almost a religious faith people seem to have that somehow its going to work out. Look "eternal mind" people. I want to believe. "Help thou mine unbelief"!

I hope this helped a bit.

[Heliotrope]

If I have given you the impression that I believe in a soul then I must not have been clear, but I do suspect that conciousness is unique to an individaul and bound to a body because I have so far seen no evidence to the contrary. And the idea that conciousness can be transferred is riddled with philosophical problems, the most basic of which are embodied in the questions I wrote in my last post. If anyone could please answer those questions for me then I feel like I would have a better understanding of where the "eternal mind" people are coming from.

Honestly I have found your explanation even more confusing. You seem to have confirmed some of my issues with the eternal mind, such as the fact that two copies of a mind would diverge into seperate people as soon as they started having different experiences. Well wouldn't they start having different experiences the second after they were created? So how is "making back-up copies" of your mind even possible? And while you say that there are "no dual-consciousnesses", dual-consciousnesses seem to be exactly what a lot of eternal mind people expect. In fact I think the existence of dual-conciousnesses is a critical element of the "eternal mind" theory. Without it how is the transfer made? And finally "two people with a lot of shared memories" doesn't mean they are the same person. My wife and I have a lot of shared memories but we each have our own distinct consciousness. If I die I will not perceive that I continue to live on because my wife is still alive. Neither would you perceive anything after death simply because there still existed a copy of you with "a lot of shared memories". That is not immortality.

Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID and specifically look at RAID 1. That is the simplest equivalent to what I'm talking about except imagine the mirrored drives are in two separate countries and are linked by a network.

Look its really not about having "your consciousness" continue to exist forever. At least not if we use your definition of a conscioussness which seems to be anything with a particular set of "memories, knowledge, and personality". Immortality is about maintaining an unbroken sense of continuity of existence. That may or may not be necessarily connected with what you are referring to as a "consciousness" but when I say "conscioussness" that's what I'm talking about. To me, that is "me". This feeling of self-awareness. There are plenty of simple thought experiments and even some real world examples that can confirm that two beings with the same "memories, knowledge, and personality" likely do not have the same sense of self. So when one dies they still go into oblivion while the other lives on.

I don't disagree with your points here but I have a few thoughts on how this can and must be done if the goals of those who gather here are to be met. Let's imagine the day has come when it is possible to run a high resolution MRI of a person's brain and upload their entire repertoire of memories, personality and individuality to a digital substrate (computer). You and I will agree that the digital copy might be neat but it's still not "them" in the continuity of consciousness definition. However let's imagine the technology advances a bit more and it becomes possible to hardwire a link via carbon nanotubes to each individual neuron of the human brain. At this point the computer would have instantaneous input that would let it keep the "copy" exactly up to date. If it allowed the copy to "run live" it might even have experiences and be able to update the wetware brain. However we're still not at the critical point. The critical point would come the day our wetware human decides his protein and myelin processor isn't going to cut it anymore. Perhaps he is diagnosed with early stage Alzheimer's. Alzheimers, in a guy who doesn't even like to sleep at night because of the loss of consciousness and control it entails. THIS is the critical point. The wetware brain was already effortlessly feeding information back and forth between itself and the digital side of things. The digital side is a complete copy and so "it" knows that it is conscious. The meatware knows that "it" is conscious. They both are fully synced. There is no differentiation of consciousness between the two. Both are taking in the same sensory input. The "consciousness" is fully merged. At that point a nanosurgical probe signals a region of the brain not involved in the sensation of "me-ness" to undergo apoptosis (controlled cell death). Let's choose the cerebellum which is involved in balance and coordination. This process is done for the benefit of the nervous presumptive uploadee. No sedation or anesthetic is involved as he is fiercely interested in making sure "he" does not disappear in the process. As the biological cerebellum atrophies away perhaps over the course of a couple hours the carbon nanotube connections take over signalling the body to maintain balance and sensory functions.

Our subject doesn't notice the difference so he gives the go-ahead for the next stage. The occipital lobe is next. It is largely concerned with processing sight and the digital processor is far advanced beyond it's abilities at this point of time so switching from biological control to the nanotubes only causes a slightly increase in visual processing ability. The process continues over the next several days. At each juncture the man digitizes a piece of his fading brain. However he ensures the process is ceased entirely while he sleeps at night. Finally all of the brain has been switched to digital control with the exception of the frontal lobe. The nanoelectrical apparatus is controlling the autonomic systems of the body, regulating heart rate and respiration. It is the sole repository of his memories. It is processing new sensory input and storing it to memory. The frontal lobe of the brain is the section that has been worried since the beginning about the risk of it's demise. However the parallel model of it in the computer is just as worried. After all, they are identical synapse for synapse, input for input, output for output.

Slowly, and with the knowledge that there is no other way to ensure his survival the man pushes the button causing the frontal lobe to undergo apoptosis.

Twenty minutes later it is done. The body has not moved. He lets out a deep breath. Alzheimer's cannot destroy him now. Indeed, if he keeps live synced copies of his consciousness in multiple locations on earth very little could. If he launches copies of his consciousness in various directions across the universe - all capable of reintegrating and joining into a single entity if they ever come into contact again - he will have achieved practical physical immortality. And, he'll never have to sleep again.

I really think this needs to be thought out in a little more philosophical detail here. Or at least I need someone to explain it to me in a little more detail. I need the nitty-gritty if I'm going to accept this possibility. Right now it just seems like a lot of vagaries and inflated hope in the powers of technology. Its almost a religious faith people seem to have that somehow its going to work out. Look "eternal mind" people. I want to believe. "Help thou mine unbelief"!

I hope this helped a bit.

i'm excited about the RAID computer technology.

[Zoroaster]

I don't disagree with your points here but I have a few thoughts on how this can and must be done if the goals of those who gather here are to be met. Let's imagine the day has come when it is possible to run a high resolution MRI of a person's brain and upload their entire repertoire of memories, personality and individuality to a digital substrate (computer). You and I will agree that the digital copy might be neat but it's still not "them" in the continuity of consciousness definition. However let's imagine the technology advances a bit more and it becomes possible to hardwire a link via carbon nanotubes to each individual neuron of the human brain. At this point the computer would have instantaneous input that would let it keep the "copy" exactly up to date. If it allowed the copy to "run live" it might even have experiences and be able to update the wetware brain. However we're still not at the critical point. The critical point would come the day our wetware human decides his protein and myelin processor isn't going to cut it anymore. Perhaps he is diagnosed with early stage Alzheimer's. Alzheimers, in a guy who doesn't even like to sleep at night because of the loss of consciousness and control it entails. THIS is the critical point. The wetware brain was already effortlessly feeding information back and forth between itself and the digital side of things. The digital side is a complete copy and so "it" knows that it is conscious. The meatware knows that "it" is conscious. They both are fully synced. There is no differentiation of consciousness between the two. Both are taking in the same sensory input. The "consciousness" is fully merged. At that point a nanosurgical probe signals a region of the brain not involved in the sensation of "me-ness" to undergo apoptosis (controlled cell death). Let's choose the cerebellum which is involved in balance and coordination. This process is done for the benefit of the nervous presumptive uploadee. No sedation or anesthetic is involved as he is fiercely interested in making sure "he" does not disappear in the process. As the biological cerebellum atrophies away perhaps over the course of a couple hours the carbon nanotube connections take over signalling the body to maintain balance and sensory functions.

Our subject doesn't notice the difference so he gives the go-ahead for the next stage. The occipital lobe is next. It is largely concerned with processing sight and the digital processor is far advanced beyond it's abilities at this point of time so switching from biological control to the nanotubes only causes a slightly increase in visual processing ability. The process continues over the next several days. At each juncture the man digitizes a piece of his fading brain. However he ensures the process is ceased entirely while he sleeps at night. Finally all of the brain has been switched to digital control with the exception of the frontal lobe. The nanoelectrical apparatus is controlling the autonomic systems of the body, regulating heart rate and respiration. It is the sole repository of his memories. It is processing new sensory input and storing it to memory. The frontal lobe of the brain is the section that has been worried since the beginning about the risk of it's demise. However the parallel model of it in the computer is just as worried. After all, they are identical synapse for synapse, input for input, output for output.

Slowly, and with the knowledge that there is no other way to ensure his survival the man pushes the button causing the frontal lobe to undergo apoptosis.

Twenty minutes later it is done. The body has not moved. He lets out a deep breath. Alzheimer's cannot destroy him now. Indeed, if he keeps live synced copies of his consciousness in multiple locations on earth very little could. If he launches copies of his consciousness in various directions across the universe - all capable of reintegrating and joining into a single entity if they ever come into contact again - he will have achieved practical physical immortality. And, he'll never have to sleep again.

I hope this helped a bit.

THANK YOU! This is exactly what I needed. A nitty-gritty details report of how a mind transfer could occur. There has been about a half-hour gap between this sentance and my last during which I've reviewed all of my concerns with the "eternal mind" and I believe that the scenario you have described resolves every single one of them, including this transfer issue I've been harping on. As long as the frontal lobe (or cerebral cortex or wherever consciousness turns out to be located) is killed slowly then it would also give later potential transferees a method of determining whether or not the transfer was successful.

The scenario you've presented is at least plausible, now the only question remaining is, "would it work?" I am not yet convinced that it would but I would like to be, and I may start a topic on that issue specifically in the near future.

[forever freedom]

I don't disagree with your points here but I have a few thoughts on how this can and must be done if the goals of those who gather here are to be met. Let's imagine the day has come when it is possible to run a high resolution MRI of a person's brain and upload their entire repertoire of memories, personality and individuality to a digital substrate (computer). You and I will agree that the digital copy might be neat but it's still not "them" in the continuity of consciousness definition. However let's imagine the technology advances a bit more and it becomes possible to hardwire a link via carbon nanotubes to each individual neuron of the human brain. At this point the computer would have instantaneous input that would let it keep the "copy" exactly up to date. If it allowed the copy to "run live" it might even have experiences and be able to update the wetware brain. However we're still not at the critical point. The critical point would come the day our wetware human decides his protein and myelin processor isn't going to cut it anymore. Perhaps he is diagnosed with early stage Alzheimer's. Alzheimers, in a guy who doesn't even like to sleep at night because of the loss of consciousness and control it entails. THIS is the critical point. The wetware brain was already effortlessly feeding information back and forth between itself and the digital side of things. The digital side is a complete copy and so "it" knows that it is conscious. The meatware knows that "it" is conscious. They both are fully synced. There is no differentiation of consciousness between the two. Both are taking in the same sensory input. The "consciousness" is fully merged. At that point a nanosurgical probe signals a region of the brain not involved in the sensation of "me-ness" to undergo apoptosis (controlled cell death). Let's choose the cerebellum which is involved in balance and coordination. This process is done for the benefit of the nervous presumptive uploadee. No sedation or anesthetic is involved as he is fiercely interested in making sure "he" does not disappear in the process. As the biological cerebellum atrophies away perhaps over the course of a couple hours the carbon nanotube connections take over signalling the body to maintain balance and sensory functions.

Our subject doesn't notice the difference so he gives the go-ahead for the next stage. The occipital lobe is next. It is largely concerned with processing sight and the digital processor is far advanced beyond it's abilities at this point of time so switching from biological control to the nanotubes only causes a slightly increase in visual processing ability. The process continues over the next several days. At each juncture the man digitizes a piece of his fading brain. However he ensures the process is ceased entirely while he sleeps at night. Finally all of the brain has been switched to digital control with the exception of the frontal lobe. The nanoelectrical apparatus is controlling the autonomic systems of the body, regulating heart rate and respiration. It is the sole repository of his memories. It is processing new sensory input and storing it to memory. The frontal lobe of the brain is the section that has been worried since the beginning about the risk of it's demise. However the parallel model of it in the computer is just as worried. After all, they are identical synapse for synapse, input for input, output for output.

Slowly, and with the knowledge that there is no other way to ensure his survival the man pushes the button causing the frontal lobe to undergo apoptosis.

Twenty minutes later it is done. The body has not moved. He lets out a deep breath. Alzheimer's cannot destroy him now. Indeed, if he keeps live synced copies of his consciousness in multiple locations on earth very little could. If he launches copies of his consciousness in various directions across the universe - all capable of reintegrating and joining into a single entity if they ever come into contact again - he will have achieved practical physical immortality. And, he'll never have to sleep again.

This was a nice explanation. This is what i envisioned too. This opens the possibility of having multiple consciousnesses, if you got a powerful enough mind.

[Cyberbrain]

bump