3 ms·

I’m not sure it’s so far fetched. Scanning sure, that’s a separate consciousness or a copy, but what if you replaced one neuron at a time with a digital/electr

I’m not sure it’s so far fetched. Scanning sure, that’s a separate consciousness or a copy, but what if you replaced one neuron at a time with a digital/electrical component? Wouldn’t there be a point, around halfway, that you would be more robot than human? And so you can become totally digital if you accept that losing one neuron wouldn’t be enough to end your current stream of consciousness?

staticman2 6y ago
The electronic neuron would have to behave just like a legit neuron, and would have to be installable without damaging the legit neurons. Even if this is philosophically possible, that doesn't suggest it is inventible. How do you model and replace a neuron without tearing up and killing the host organism?
sonofhans 6y ago
Personal identity philosophy is full of examples like this: swapping brains, swapping half brains, swapping cells one at a time. It’s an interesting thought exercise. I don’t have a complete answer, but a few thoughts: First, there’s no reason to believe we’ll ever be able to replicate a neuron with non-meat technology. Nanomachines may be able to do this. Are they going to age and die as well, like real neurons? Second, replacing one neuron at a time looks hard as well. Best case is perhaps a self-replicating nanomachine that chugs through the brain, effectively eating neurons and building new ones. This process is going to change the brain, since it has to be carried out in constant time. How will it change the brain? Who knows? Third, it’s not just neurons. You’d need to replicate every cell in, and on, a human body. Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails. Fourth, how will this new 100%-technical human interact with its environment? Current thinking is that some auto-immune diseases are triggered by a insufficient challenge to young immune systems, effectively by an environment that’s too clean. Should we emulate this as well? So pretty quickly I think it’s turns out that we’re not emulating humans, we’re creating new things that are somewhat human and somewhat digital. How will this entity act over the long term? Ian McDonald wrote, “there are infinite ways of being human.” Perhaps we need to expand our definitions.
- ben_w 6y ago
  > Third, it’s not just neurons. You’d need to replicate every cell in, and on, a human body. Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails. Do you? Don’t get me wrong, the chemical environment of the brain, and the wider body, can alter states of consciousness — I recall stories about people whose gut bacteria produces alcohol and permanently fail any blood alcohol tests as a consequence — but if you know what those chemicals are, do you really need to replicate the fungi making them?
- Chris2048 6y ago
  > there’s no reason to believe we’ll ever be able to replicate a neuron with non-meat technology Can you back this up with anything? In ignorance, I could just as well state: "there’s no reason to believe we won't ever be able to replicate a neuron.." I suspect you are being pedantic with the definition of neuron, i.e. not allowing for simulations that contribute the same/similar net effect but fail to account for every last irrelevant molecule. The fact that you say the whole body needs to be replicated is what makes me suspect this: > Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails If this where true, elimination all the fungus in my toenails would make me: inhuman or non-conscious? If it would simply make me (chaos-butterfly style) a different, but still human & conscious version of myself, then I'm not sure why it's necessary. I think the definition of human can be stretched, and obviously once your body is replaced digitally you have altered the definition. But I think you have chosen an overly strict definition in your "every cell" maxim.

staticman2 6y ago

The electronic neuron would have to behave just like a legit neuron, and would have to be installable without damaging the legit neurons. Even if this is philosophically possible, that doesn't suggest it is inventible. How do you model and replace a neuron without tearing up and killing the host organism?

sonofhans 6y ago

Personal identity philosophy is full of examples like this: swapping brains, swapping half brains, swapping cells one at a time. It’s an interesting thought exercise. I don’t have a complete answer, but a few thoughts: First, there’s no reason to believe we’ll ever be able to replicate a neuron with non-meat technology. Nanomachines may be able to do this. Are they going to age and die as well, like real neurons? Second, replacing one neuron at a time looks hard as well. Best case is perhaps a self-replicating nanomachine that chugs through the brain, effectively eating neurons and building new ones. This process is going to change the brain, since it has to be carried out in constant time. How will it change the brain? Who knows? Third, it’s not just neurons. You’d need to replicate every cell in, and on, a human body. Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails. Fourth, how will this new 100%-technical human interact with its environment? Current thinking is that some auto-immune diseases are triggered by a insufficient challenge to young immune systems, effectively by an environment that’s too clean. Should we emulate this as well? So pretty quickly I think it’s turns out that we’re not emulating humans, we’re creating new things that are somewhat human and somewhat digital. How will this entity act over the long term? Ian McDonald wrote, “there are infinite ways of being human.” Perhaps we need to expand our definitions.

ben_w 6y ago
> Third, it’s not just neurons. You’d need to replicate every cell in, and on, a human body. Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails. Do you? Don’t get me wrong, the chemical environment of the brain, and the wider body, can alter states of consciousness — I recall stories about people whose gut bacteria produces alcohol and permanently fail any blood alcohol tests as a consequence — but if you know what those chemicals are, do you really need to replicate the fungi making them?
Chris2048 6y ago
> there’s no reason to believe we’ll ever be able to replicate a neuron with non-meat technology Can you back this up with anything? In ignorance, I could just as well state: "there’s no reason to believe we won't ever be able to replicate a neuron.." I suspect you are being pedantic with the definition of neuron, i.e. not allowing for simulations that contribute the same/similar net effect but fail to account for every last irrelevant molecule. The fact that you say the whole body needs to be replicated is what makes me suspect this: > Including, again, the different species of fungus that live exclusively in our toenails If this where true, elimination all the fungus in my toenails would make me: inhuman or non-conscious? If it would simply make me (chaos-butterfly style) a different, but still human & conscious version of myself, then I'm not sure why it's necessary. I think the definition of human can be stretched, and obviously once your body is replaced digitally you have altered the definition. But I think you have chosen an overly strict definition in your "every cell" maxim.