3 ms·

Not really a question, more of a remark: both the destructive and non-destructive approaches result in the same thing: a copy of 'you', not actually 'you'. (Th

Not really a question, more of a remark: both the destructive and non-destructive approaches result in the same thing: a copy of 'you', not actually 'you'. (The same is true when you go to sleep, of course. Whoever wakes up isn't you either) What you would need is a Ship of Theseus approach - preserving the consciousness stream while neuron after neuron is being replaced by a digital version, slowly, to convince the stream into thinking it's still the same. You can't just take a single scan; you have to keep scanning continuously and keep a running feedback stream between the (decreasing) wetbrain and the (increasing) bitbrain to ensure the illusion of continuity. (But to be honest, I don't actually believe in consciousness or a Self. Whoever started writing this short comment wasn't 'me', and neither am I, nothing is)

dsiroker 6y ago
The gradual replacement approach (as you describe it) is a useful thought experiment that gets people more comfortable with the possibility of mind emulation but the end state is the same for both approaches. One just intuitively feels more you than the other, but as you said, it's likely all an illusion so doing it while you "sleep" is probably enough to make you sufficiently happy to be alive when you wake up non-biologically.
- type0 6y ago
  This would be like Bicentennial Man in reverse. Call me skeptic but it sounds like a good foundation for a new novel and not like a good basis for Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bicentennial_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bicentennial_Man
- p1esk 6y ago
  With the gradual replacement scenario it might be easier to detect any fundamental differences between start and end states. Like if the end state is actually a p-zombie. But I haven't really thought this through.
Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
You seem to be conflicted on what you believe on many of these topics. Which is understandable for such a profound question. There is a very good game called Soma which explores many of these topics, which may help explore your own beliefs and subconscious reactions to the questions of instantiation and your own relation to the various modes and levels of existence of consciousness and self. I highly recommend you play it if you have time and haven't already.

dsiroker 6y ago

The gradual replacement approach (as you describe it) is a useful thought experiment that gets people more comfortable with the possibility of mind emulation but the end state is the same for both approaches. One just intuitively feels more you than the other, but as you said, it's likely all an illusion so doing it while you "sleep" is probably enough to make you sufficiently happy to be alive when you wake up non-biologically.

type0 6y ago
This would be like Bicentennial Man in reverse. Call me skeptic but it sounds like a good foundation for a new novel and not like a good basis for Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bicentennial_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bicentennial_Man
p1esk 6y ago
With the gradual replacement scenario it might be easier to detect any fundamental differences between start and end states. Like if the end state is actually a p-zombie. But I haven't really thought this through.

Erlich_Bachman 6y ago

You seem to be conflicted on what you believe on many of these topics. Which is understandable for such a profound question. There is a very good game called Soma which explores many of these topics, which may help explore your own beliefs and subconscious reactions to the questions of instantiation and your own relation to the various modes and levels of existence of consciousness and self. I highly recommend you play it if you have time and haven't already.