4 ms·

Uploaded minds is hardly an argument depending on cartesian duality. Arguing that there's something irreproducible about the human brain is quite close to carte

Uploaded minds is hardly an argument depending on cartesian duality. Arguing that there's something irreproducible about the human brain is quite close to cartesian duality. I am not arguing that uploading minds is any more feasible than a generation ship, but it is at least more plausible than hyperdrive -- based on what we think we know right now.

mitchty 13y ago
I guess I disagree that uploading minds is more feasible. One is more of an engineering/physics challenge, and uploading minds is dependent upon a vast set of unknown unknowns. We aren't even out of the door on the idea of biological computing let alone at the mailbox.
- TheCraiggers 13y ago
  One key difference is that we know brains can exist. We might not know the entirety of how they work, but the important thing is we already know they can be reproduced in some fashion. Hyperdrive or any other form of FTL travel is purely in our thoughts. Nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible in our current reality. For all we know we could spend an infinite time attempting it and never achieve it.
  - mitchty 13y ago
    True, however a key distinction i'm making here is knowing something exists and knowing how it works and being able to replicate that in another system could be just as much of an infinite timesink. I'd rephrase the "nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible" to, nothing has been observed to demonstrate its possibility. That and things like warping space could throw a wrench into the "we can't travel faster than light". But maybe we can end run around it. Though the same can be said of the brain, we really know we don't know a lot more than what we don't know about physics.
  - snowwrestler 13y ago
    We have no evidence at all that a given brain can be reproduced. We know that new brains can be made and developed (i.e. procreation), and even then we don't really know how that works. But the post above said "mind" not "brain" which typically signifies that the author draws some sort of distinction between the two. I'm just saying: I don't know of any physical evidence for that distinction.
snowwrestler 13y ago
Human brains are no more difficult to exactly reproduce than any other piece of matter: extremely difficult. The best we've done to date is a few previously entangled particles. Edit to add: what I'm talking about here is quantum teleportation of the matter of the brain. Typically when people talk about "uploading a mind" they mean that the mind is software running on the hardware of the brain--like Windows running on a PC. I'm not aware of any scientific evidence that the mind and brain can be considered separately in that way.
- Tloewald 13y ago
  The question comes down to "could you run a sufficiently accurate simulation of a brain on a sufficiently powerful computer that it could pass for the mind of the person whose brain was being simulated"? I'd say the belief that the belief this is impossible is a variant of the cartesian duality.

mitchty 13y ago

I guess I disagree that uploading minds is more feasible. One is more of an engineering/physics challenge, and uploading minds is dependent upon a vast set of unknown unknowns. We aren't even out of the door on the idea of biological computing let alone at the mailbox.

TheCraiggers 13y ago
One key difference is that we know brains can exist. We might not know the entirety of how they work, but the important thing is we already know they can be reproduced in some fashion. Hyperdrive or any other form of FTL travel is purely in our thoughts. Nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible in our current reality. For all we know we could spend an infinite time attempting it and never achieve it.
- mitchty 13y ago
  True, however a key distinction i'm making here is knowing something exists and knowing how it works and being able to replicate that in another system could be just as much of an infinite timesink. I'd rephrase the "nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible" to, nothing has been observed to demonstrate its possibility. That and things like warping space could throw a wrench into the "we can't travel faster than light". But maybe we can end run around it. Though the same can be said of the brain, we really know we don't know a lot more than what we don't know about physics.
- snowwrestler 13y ago
  We have no evidence at all that a given brain can be reproduced. We know that new brains can be made and developed (i.e. procreation), and even then we don't really know how that works. But the post above said "mind" not "brain" which typically signifies that the author draws some sort of distinction between the two. I'm just saying: I don't know of any physical evidence for that distinction.

snowwrestler 13y ago

Human brains are no more difficult to exactly reproduce than any other piece of matter: extremely difficult. The best we've done to date is a few previously entangled particles. Edit to add: what I'm talking about here is quantum teleportation of the matter of the brain. Typically when people talk about "uploading a mind" they mean that the mind is software running on the hardware of the brain--like Windows running on a PC. I'm not aware of any scientific evidence that the mind and brain can be considered separately in that way.

Tloewald 13y ago
The question comes down to "could you run a sufficiently accurate simulation of a brain on a sufficiently powerful computer that it could pass for the mind of the person whose brain was being simulated"? I'd say the belief that the belief this is impossible is a variant of the cartesian duality.