158 replies to this topic

[tbeal]

I don't beleive in a soul per say but I think definitely that consciousness is a subjective expirience and will never become completly objective

[Matt]

Say cryonics were to work and a person that had died 100 years ago were brought back to life through advanced technologies like nanotech and biotech.

There are 2 problems and 2 beliefs that will be shattered or atleast, in question even by believers.

First of all, Some people believe in re-incarnation. If that person were to wake up and be the same person and mind frame as before he died then, Wouldnt that prove re-incarnation to be false.

God, heaven , devil, hell and the rest of it

Now people believe that the soul is the true self, its you. its what makes you. After death, this soul is supposed to go to 1 of 2 places, heaven or hell. Now Since they say, You will see you're family in heaven etc... Im assuming the soul ' learns ' too. otherwise, how would you know you friends and family in heaven.

now say this guy woke up 100 years later, Im sure 1 of the first questions would be, Did you see heaven or god !!? Now what if this guy says. It feels like ive been out of it for seconds, there was no god or heaven. Which Im confident that it will be the case. It disproves the whole soul thing and shows that its just the brain and you and you and the brain, no soul involved.

Now assuming that the soul left the body 100 years ago, Surely Humans have not got the power to litrually throw the soul back into the body from its place in heaven that this guy were supposed to be for 100 years. Surely humans would not have that godly power. Now if that were the case and there was a heaven, If the soul is you then surely that soul would bring with it the memories of heaven

What Im trying to say is, If and I think WHEN cryonics is succesful in brining back a human many people will question their beliefs in a heaven and god and re-incarnation


Its really late, well... early I think I confused myself a bit there but I hope you get what Im trying to say

[jaydfox]

whoa182,

I think that there would still be one "saving grace" for both reincarnation and the idea of heaven, hell, etc.

Time. The time between death and the application of cryonic technologies. Remember, cryonics isn't being sold as bringing people back from oblivion, from that place that atheists think that we go when we die. Cryonics is a suspension technology, as in the classic sci-fi term "suspended animation". It's a life support procedure. It's not much different, as Brian Wowk likes to point out, from being in a coma. Conscious thought has stopped. But when your heart stops, you aren't "dead". Your brain cells continue to funciton for a few minutes. Even after aerobic respiration is no longer possible, due to lack of oxygen, there is still quite a bit of time, hours at least, before your brain's neurons degrade irreparably.

And this ties in to religion, in some respects. In traditional Jewish customs, as I understand it, they do not believe that a person's soul truly leaves the body indefinitely until after three days. In other words, it's possible to revive someone after they've been "dead" for two days. Well, if we cryonically suspend someone six hours after death, then we are basically preserving them in a state in which the Jewish religion says that the soul is still there. So if that person is revived 80 years from now, there is no conflict with the Jewish faith.

And very few people seriously expect cryonics to work on someone who's been clinically dead for more than three days without some sort of life support, e.g. cryonics.

And don't fret that religion has "dodged the issue". It is this very argument which may help overcome the fierce opposition posed by many religions, who currently fear cryonics as a means to cheat death and defy God. It's no more cheating death than receiving any other medical procedure. It's no more cheating death than having someone administer CPR. After all, before CPR is administered, a person's heart has stopped. They are clinically dead. CPR has "brought them back" from the dead. Yet very few religions, and only the fundamentalists of those religions, would oppose CPR on these grounds. And once people have the proper perspective on cryonics, I doubt that many religious folks would continue their ideological opposition to cryonics. It's just a life support technology.

[Infernity]

I think that the *soul*, irichc, is just a way to summarize in one word your fully self, it is only your self development which caused by your experience which is idiosyncratic for you only; No one but you is aware in the exact way to your experiences, which perform you the *you* and only (and of course- everything is in your head, all you know is happening in your brain!)
Your *soul* dies with yourself ultimate oblivion which happens in case of death of the brain (as for us, just- death).
You should just read pages 277-278 in the book- *The First Immortal* by James L. Halperin. It shall clear up for you what is what you know as *your own self*, and I say that you can call it your *soul* too, but it still shall be the the same thing...
Your whole self awarness is your "soul" and it shall die and be forgotten with your death!
Think about it and read it (277-278 in the book)...

Yours
~Infernity

Edited by infernity, 10 March 2005 - 04:12 AM.

[eternaltraveler]

I've changed my mind.

I've realized that whether or not a copy views itself as equivilant or actually being the original is entirely subjective. You can either decide that a perfect copy is a continuation of you, or you can choose otherwise, and it makes no difference. Might as well make the choice that allows transfering over to better substrates than these meat bags of ours.

[bgwowk]

JustinRebo wrote:

Might as well make the choice that allows transfering over to better substrates than these meat bags of ours.

Just be aware that believing your awareness can be supported by a substrate different than a human brain is yet another philosophical jump beyond believing an atomically-identical brain copy preserves personhood. While I feel strongly that matter copies preserve personhood, I am still an agnostic about logic copies ("uploading").

Of course, as usual, the natural selection argument applies. It looks inevitable to me that the universe will eventually be dominated by beings that accept copies, even just logical copies, as personal continuers because such beings will out-reproduce, outlive, and out-think beings that believe otherwise.

---BrianW

Edited by bgwowk, 08 August 2005 - 05:44 AM.

[th3hegem0n]

Soul?

http://www.imminst.o...140

I urge anyone that comes across ridiculous debates such as these to refer to the entry above.

[eternaltraveler]

While I feel strongly that matter copies preserve personhood, I am still an agnostic about logic copies ("uploading").

My position is now that if a copy of me (the part that matters, the mind) in whatever substrate thinks feels and acts like me. Then it is a continuation of me.

if it looks like a duck...

(btw thanks for being patient in this discussion. It must get tiresome to have to explain this stuff over and over again to close minded pig headed buffoons like me )

[bgwowk]

It's refreshing to see change in someone's thinking about this issue. In my experience, arguing about personal identity is like arging about politics or religion. Participants tend to be passionately committed to certain points of view. I'm astonished at how quickly identity arguments generate expletives and turn ad-hominem, leaving highly intelligent otherwise disciplined minds practically foaming at the mouth.

I myself do not understand why I feel such a complusion to waste electrons on this esoteric issue when I should be doing other things. The issue obviously touches something deep in us.

---BrianW