3 ms·

> The real test would be whether 'faking' body parts by sending mock sensory data would lead to the same result as having the real body part. How about a test

> The real test would be whether 'faking' body parts by sending mock sensory data would lead to the same result as having the real body part. How about a test that fakes that body part which receives sensory data and triggers a response? Perhaps it can lead to the same results as having a real brain! /s (Sorry, couldn't resist!) On a serious note, articles about how for example the gut affects our mental state (all the way to links with autism) were posted to HN many times. Calling the idea that our bodies are like side accessories attached to our brains “probably wrong” may be an overreach, but personally I suspect the stage at which it becomes a viable idea would also be one where we are able to just copy an entire human brain. (Which might just turn out not to be a meaningful proposition, but I guess we’ll see!) And as long as we aren’t there/don’t know for sure, I’d put forward that the mere possibility of a “body replacement” actually destroying personality to an unknown extent is enough of a reason to never deploy it in foreseeable future except as last resort.

ImprobableTruth 6y ago
>On a serious note, articles about how for example the gut affects our mental state (all the way to links with autism) were posted to HN many times. Of course, but that's because our gut is directly connected to the brain. Hardcore embodiment people will tell you that you're literally thinking with your gut. It's not like I'm saying you could just swap bodies and it wouldn't have an effect, it absolutely would, my point is simply that this is due to causation, because of the body influencing the brain, rather than distribution where the body is literally part of the mind. >And as long as we aren’t there/don’t know for sure, I’d put forward that the mere possibility of a “body replacement” actually destroying personality to an unknown extent is enough of a reason to never deploy it in foreseeable future except as last resort. Sure, but I'd say it's essentially what we're doing already. We know e.g. hormone treatment as part of sex reassignment causes changes to the brain and definitely influences personality. It's not like anyone is proposing this sort of stuff for fun (I think).
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  In a sense, everything you do, read, see, hear, experience, changes your personality. Usually the changes are so small that they can be observed only as they accumulate over the years. Sometimes, there are big changes (usually surrounding traumas of various kind, physical and mental). But the truth is, personality is a dynamic, ever-evolving construct.
- strogonoff 6y ago
  > Of course, but that's because our gut is directly connected to the brain. Along with the rest of the body; and note that we can’t treat autism by altering just the brain or the signals sent between the brain and the gut—we have to resort to introducing changes in the gut. To me it looks like a strong indicator that given current level of progress for medical purposes we ethically cannot assign personality and consciousness to any particular part of the body (including the brain). > Hardcore embodiment people will tell you that you're literally thinking with your gut. …and while I don’t quite identify with that position, we can’t deny they may be partially right until we exclude that possibility. We haven’t definitively concluded what consciousness is and where it arises. Many people gravitate towards visualizing thought and consciousness as happening fully in the brain, but it’s not the only way of visualization—and perhaps neither is it even the most optimal: if gut microbiota affects us so much, doesn’t it make sense to include the gut into the feeling of “mind’s I”? Where then to draw the line? > I'd say it's essentially what we're doing already. We know e.g. hormone treatment as part of sex reassignment causes changes to the brain and definitely influences personality. For a while I’ve been thinking about continuity, and how it might be among the key puzzle pieces of consciousness. A sex reassignment brings a somewhat fast but still gradual change, while getting a body replacement may not be very different from a death from insider’s view: you go under anaesthesia; but is there a you that wakes up? But then I guess should we be concerned with that “insider’s view”? What is that insider and does it even exist? (I know this is getting into the territory of the Star Trek Transporter thought experiment and the like, but that it’s easy to end up there might also hint at an insufficient level of knowledge we have about consciousness.)
TeMPOraL 6y ago
> How about a test that fakes that body part which receives sensory data and triggers a response? Perhaps it can lead to the same results as having a real brain! /s You're joking, but this "fake brain" would be an AGI, and building an AGI has many active fields of research and development around it. Of course most of these fields don't care about perfectly replicating human brains and embodying such artificial minds, because it's just extra work, and building a mind without a body is already hard enough.
- strogonoff 6y ago
  AGI aside though, I was more hoping to highlight the so-called hard problem. If your brain is replaced, presumably it’ll be you as far as the rest of humanity is concerned; is that satisfactory? Replacing a body may not be entirely dissimilar.

ImprobableTruth 6y ago

>On a serious note, articles about how for example the gut affects our mental state (all the way to links with autism) were posted to HN many times. Of course, but that's because our gut is directly connected to the brain. Hardcore embodiment people will tell you that you're literally thinking with your gut. It's not like I'm saying you could just swap bodies and it wouldn't have an effect, it absolutely would, my point is simply that this is due to causation, because of the body influencing the brain, rather than distribution where the body is literally part of the mind. >And as long as we aren’t there/don’t know for sure, I’d put forward that the mere possibility of a “body replacement” actually destroying personality to an unknown extent is enough of a reason to never deploy it in foreseeable future except as last resort. Sure, but I'd say it's essentially what we're doing already. We know e.g. hormone treatment as part of sex reassignment causes changes to the brain and definitely influences personality. It's not like anyone is proposing this sort of stuff for fun (I think).

TeMPOraL 6y ago
In a sense, everything you do, read, see, hear, experience, changes your personality. Usually the changes are so small that they can be observed only as they accumulate over the years. Sometimes, there are big changes (usually surrounding traumas of various kind, physical and mental). But the truth is, personality is a dynamic, ever-evolving construct.
strogonoff 6y ago
> Of course, but that's because our gut is directly connected to the brain. Along with the rest of the body; and note that we can’t treat autism by altering just the brain or the signals sent between the brain and the gut—we have to resort to introducing changes in the gut. To me it looks like a strong indicator that given current level of progress for medical purposes we ethically cannot assign personality and consciousness to any particular part of the body (including the brain). > Hardcore embodiment people will tell you that you're literally thinking with your gut. …and while I don’t quite identify with that position, we can’t deny they may be partially right until we exclude that possibility. We haven’t definitively concluded what consciousness is and where it arises. Many people gravitate towards visualizing thought and consciousness as happening fully in the brain, but it’s not the only way of visualization—and perhaps neither is it even the most optimal: if gut microbiota affects us so much, doesn’t it make sense to include the gut into the feeling of “mind’s I”? Where then to draw the line? > I'd say it's essentially what we're doing already. We know e.g. hormone treatment as part of sex reassignment causes changes to the brain and definitely influences personality. For a while I’ve been thinking about continuity, and how it might be among the key puzzle pieces of consciousness. A sex reassignment brings a somewhat fast but still gradual change, while getting a body replacement may not be very different from a death from insider’s view: you go under anaesthesia; but is there a you that wakes up? But then I guess should we be concerned with that “insider’s view”? What is that insider and does it even exist? (I know this is getting into the territory of the Star Trek Transporter thought experiment and the like, but that it’s easy to end up there might also hint at an insufficient level of knowledge we have about consciousness.)

TeMPOraL 6y ago

> How about a test that fakes that body part which receives sensory data and triggers a response? Perhaps it can lead to the same results as having a real brain! /s You're joking, but this "fake brain" would be an AGI, and building an AGI has many active fields of research and development around it. Of course most of these fields don't care about perfectly replicating human brains and embodying such artificial minds, because it's just extra work, and building a mind without a body is already hard enough.

strogonoff 6y ago
AGI aside though, I was more hoping to highlight the so-called hard problem. If your brain is replaced, presumably it’ll be you as far as the rest of humanity is concerned; is that satisfactory? Replacing a body may not be entirely dissimilar.