4 ms·

Insofar as grieving is an inherently, fundamentally a very particular chemical process, the answer is a resounding “no”.

Ma8ee 13d ago
If you simulate that chemical process in a computer, if necessary a quantum computer?
- fennecbutt 13d ago
  You don't even need quantum imo. On a personal meatbag level emotions are magical and something ineffable. From a scientific stance, chemical make brain go happy or sad and there's nothing special or magical about that. Every emotion we feel is because it was evolutionarily valuable for us to do so.
  - throwaway173738 13d ago
    This is too mechanistic. You also choose which emotions to pay attention to.
    - pixl97 13d ago
      This is too simple in itself. When your afraid you can choose to ignore the fear, but you are still afraid and it has physical effects that can be measured. There is at least a trinary state of possible outcomes and as the situation space becomes more complex and solutions drift apart on all 3.
- sssilver 13d ago
  Then, logically speaking, you get a simulation of griefing.
  - Ma8ee 12d ago
    And in what lies the difference?
fennecbutt 13d ago
That's a very closed definition of grieving. So by your definition a future perfectly simulated human brain cannot grieve because no chemicals are involved? Lmao.
- icantevenhold 13d ago
  Whether anything a perfectly simulated human brain (or other organism see the fruit fly simulated brain) does is actually real - in the same sense it’s real for you and me - is still up for debate i think. Assuming it’s possible to perfectly simulate a human brain
  - sssilver 13d ago
    A “perfect simulation” is no longer a simulation. The definition of the word “simulation” is: > A simulation is the artificial imitation of a real-world process, system, or event using a model As we know, “all models are wrong; some models are useful”. A “perfect simulation” is, then, an oxymoron.

Ma8ee 13d ago

If you simulate that chemical process in a computer, if necessary a quantum computer?

fennecbutt 13d ago
You don't even need quantum imo. On a personal meatbag level emotions are magical and something ineffable. From a scientific stance, chemical make brain go happy or sad and there's nothing special or magical about that. Every emotion we feel is because it was evolutionarily valuable for us to do so.
- throwaway173738 13d ago
  This is too mechanistic. You also choose which emotions to pay attention to.
  - pixl97 13d ago
    This is too simple in itself. When your afraid you can choose to ignore the fear, but you are still afraid and it has physical effects that can be measured. There is at least a trinary state of possible outcomes and as the situation space becomes more complex and solutions drift apart on all 3.
sssilver 13d ago
Then, logically speaking, you get a simulation of griefing.
- Ma8ee 12d ago
  And in what lies the difference?

fennecbutt 13d ago

That's a very closed definition of grieving. So by your definition a future perfectly simulated human brain cannot grieve because no chemicals are involved? Lmao.

icantevenhold 13d ago
Whether anything a perfectly simulated human brain (or other organism see the fruit fly simulated brain) does is actually real - in the same sense it’s real for you and me - is still up for debate i think. Assuming it’s possible to perfectly simulate a human brain
- sssilver 13d ago
  A “perfect simulation” is no longer a simulation. The definition of the word “simulation” is: > A simulation is the artificial imitation of a real-world process, system, or event using a model As we know, “all models are wrong; some models are useful”. A “perfect simulation” is, then, an oxymoron.