4 ms·

Basically, "solving" consciousness means being able to answer this question: (it is stated in simple terms, but interesting to grapple with nonetheless) Say a

by prmph 10y ago

Basically, "solving" consciousness means being able to answer this question: (it is stated in simple terms, but interesting to grapple with nonetheless) Say a loved one died. Let assume technology has progressed to the point that before he died, his brain and body was recorded in exact detail and replicated. Would you accept an simulation or instantiation of this brain/body as a "resurrection" of your loved one? If not, then consciousness is not simply a matter computation

hdhzy 10y ago
> his brain and body was recorded in exact detail and replicated. I'm not a physicist but as far as I remember it's not a matter of a advanced technology but rather a quantum limitation or the world (you cannot copy an object with all derails). > Would you accept an simulation or instantiation of this brain/body as a "resurrection" of your loved one? Of course not, it's just a simulation although a very convincing one :)
drvdevd 10y ago
I like to pose the question subjectively: what would it be like to have my own consciousness suddenly operating within a computer instead of my body, right now? Would the machine have to simulate my bodily experience to give my mind a frame of reference? I would say once I can go back and forth and know what it's like, then and possibly only then, I could accept such a resurrection. I'm curious about what Penrose would say on this perspective.
- sgt101 10y ago
  Ok - imagine you are completely paralysed, or blind, or deaf, or all of the above. Are you dead? People do, and have experienced a there and back from this.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Bill (also sleepin' dreamin')
aninhumer 10y ago
It's an interesting philosophical question, but identity is only one aspect of the nature of consciousness. (And asking whether one would "accept" the clone isn't a particularly good framing of the problem.) Far more interesting to me is how consciousness even occurs. It is seemingly impossible to study, because consciousness is fundamentally not externally observable. Even in humans, we have essentially no way of knowing for sure that anyone but oneself is conscious.

by prmph 10y ago

hdhzy 10y ago

> his brain and body was recorded in exact detail and replicated. I'm not a physicist but as far as I remember it's not a matter of a advanced technology but rather a quantum limitation or the world (you cannot copy an object with all derails). > Would you accept an simulation or instantiation of this brain/body as a "resurrection" of your loved one? Of course not, it's just a simulation although a very convincing one :)

drvdevd 10y ago

I like to pose the question subjectively: what would it be like to have my own consciousness suddenly operating within a computer instead of my body, right now? Would the machine have to simulate my bodily experience to give my mind a frame of reference? I would say once I can go back and forth and know what it's like, then and possibly only then, I could accept such a resurrection. I'm curious about what Penrose would say on this perspective.

sgt101 10y ago
Ok - imagine you are completely paralysed, or blind, or deaf, or all of the above. Are you dead? People do, and have experienced a there and back from this.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Bill (also sleepin' dreamin')

aninhumer 10y ago

It's an interesting philosophical question, but identity is only one aspect of the nature of consciousness. (And asking whether one would "accept" the clone isn't a particularly good framing of the problem.) Far more interesting to me is how consciousness even occurs. It is seemingly impossible to study, because consciousness is fundamentally not externally observable. Even in humans, we have essentially no way of knowing for sure that anyone but oneself is conscious.