4 ms·
>You're really talking about (at best) a new instantiation of the identical consciousness in a new body. That's not the original consciousness moving, that's a
by indrax 6y ago
>You're really talking about (at best) a new instantiation of the identical consciousness in a new body. That's not the original consciousness moving, that's a new (identical) consciousness coming to life.
This is making a lot of assumptions about how consciousness works. If I make a copy of a book the story doesn't move, but it is now in two places. If I destroy the original book the story isn't lost. I think experience might be more like that. Multiple copies of the same information system will all only have one subjective experience.
Yes if you run two versions they will diverge and the question is much more complicated. But if there is one moment of copy/destruction or you're scanning and then simulating/rebuilding a frozen brain, then there's no point in time where a consciousness doesn't have a future version.
- babesh 6y agoYou need to consider it from the point of view of each entity. Each entity may not like to be destroyed irrespective of whether there is a copy.
- indrax 6y agoAn entity might have a reaction to the destruction of their original body, but if the transport is done as a single step there is only 1 conscious entity, and they survive.
- patagurbon 6y agoThat is a very bold assumption.
- indrax 6y agoWhy is it more bold than the other way around?
- pmoriarty 6y agoBut a book is not a person. A book does not have experiences. A book does not think or live. There's a mechanistic, reductionist point of view that runs throughout many of the HN comments here that I find really disturbing. A lot of people seem to think that we are just machines. If we are, then sure, replacing one machine with another that works the same and has the same "data" might be unproblematic, but I don't share such a bleak and narrow view of humanity. To think and feel is not just to run a program on a computer.
- indrax 6y agoI'm starting to lean more towards a consciousness-first idealism. I don't think it's less mechanistic to say that the second copy creates a second entity. Why do you think that the thinking and feeling is tied to the original body?
- nick_kline 6y agoReligious people pine for any proof of consciousness being something other than a mechanical thing in our body but all availableinformation points to there being no magic.