X-Message-Number: 22316 Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:56:00 -0700 From: Mike Perry <> Subject: Feeling in Inorganic Substrates; Survival Robert Ettinger, #22310, and my responses: >Mike Perry mentions the artificial hippocampus under development, and writes >in part: > > > More generally, the use of artificial brain components, or > > outright uploading of the personality elements into some sort of > > programmable device, could be a fast track to physical immortality, > >Most of the brain is just housekeeping or ancillary elements, including >cognitive functions, ordinary memory, and the kind of "memory" that >constitutes >habit or personality. But the essence of being, as far as I can figure, is >in the >mechanism of subjectivity or the nature of qualia, the anatomy and physiology >of feeling. Nothing can substitute in ALL respects for a hydrogen atom, and >probably nothing can substitute in all respects, or in the essential respect, >for an organic basis of feeling. Well, if something could substitute in *all* respects for a hydrogen atom, you could just as well call it a hydrogen atom (identity of indiscernibles). So there is just one sort of thing that is a hydrogen atom. However, I would not jump from this to conclude that "probably nothing can substitute ..., in the essential respect, for an organic basis of feeling." As one thought experiment, we might imagine replacing different components of the brain of a (willing) subject with artificial (inorganic) counterparts, but gradually, over a period of time. Each change is a very small one, maybe only a tiny clump of neurons. After the changeover, the subject reports feeling fine and seems, in all essential respects, no different from someone with purely organic hardware, nor to have experienced any personality change as a result of the modification. Suppose this goes on until the entire brain is replaced. The subject still seems to be a normal human and still, psychologically, the same person as originally, based on careful tests and observations, using every available technology as necessary. We would have to conclude that, if there was a substantial change, it is not a detectable one, unless we invoke the possibility that more advanced technology might yet find a difference. This last alternative may never be completely ruled out. But I think that in the future there will often be reasons to discount it, much as today we don't worry over whether we can survive a nap. So if we could carry out the replacement as envisioned, we would have good grounds for thinking the essential elements of personality, including feeling, can be captured in inorganic materials. It remains to be seen whether this will be practical, though I for one am hopeful. (And I hope it will not take too long, the sooner the better to minimize loss of life, since this is a potentially life-saving technology. Some refinements could also be introduced, such as more rapid replacement of components, particularly in emergency cases.) One reason I am hopeful is seen, for example, in the music industry, where electronic imitations of traditional instruments are getting better and better. Not only that, but there are many other musical possibilities being realized electronically that could not happen without the new technology. I think this is suggestive of possibilities for our own personal existence. If all goes well we can both keep our humanity, but in more durable form, and expand and refine it, all by abandoning the old, organic substrate which, despite its marvels, is probably not the "last word" in things of this nature. I also think the "essence of being," if you mean one's personal identity, requires more than just feeling, unless your definition of "feeling" is expanded beyond the usual borders. For "you" of today to survive in a future version of you *requires* that that future version have memories, or some consciously discernible traces, of you of today. But that's another story (see my book)--enough for now. Mike Perry Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22316