A LONG time ago i posted here Sci-Forums about Immortality and my (somewhat nieve idea's on how that was acheivable). I want to revive that discussion as i'm in that curious want to talk about it mode, but i've got a slightly different slant on it this time. Not a how to achieve angle, but a what is. WARNING - This Ramble has ended up 3 A4 Pages long (font 12) I've read a book after the original discussion took place called "Altered Carbon" Its a fantastic book that any science-fiction fan should read. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345457684/104-7396213-7895101?v=glance (Shamless plug over) In it all citizens are issued a Cortical stack into which their "conciousness" is digitised and recorded so that in the event of their bodies "death" their "self" can be "re-sleeved" into a new body. Now (back to the real world) when your mind dies (in accidents etc) it is possable to keep the body alive on life support but it's generally agreed that "YOU" are dead. I am a bit spiritual but not really religious and i belive that the self is simply in the mind. We are merly electrical impulses in the brain that are organised like a computer program that has spent millenia "writing itself" into a basic format that we pass onto our children through birth which then develops into a "self" through life. (on a side note it's also another hypothetical fantasy of mine that one day we will figure this out and be able to, through evolution or technology, be able to pass on actuall knowledge to our children through birth rather than the "basic program" in a sort of genetic memory, the possabilities, and down sides, to this are numerous and i think, very interesting Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) We "write" our life events, decisions and learning into our memories and this "history" combined with our ability to think within the framework we construct from birth, our own unique "program", through learning, observing reactions and decision making, gives us an on-going sense of "self". Thus my question is this. I had this same thought when watching and later, discussing, the fesability of, teleportation from sci-fi's such as Star Trek and later from this book altered carbon. Through teleportation an image of you, every cell, every electrical impulse is "imaged", then destroyed and an identical construct re-created on the other side with all the same memories and mental framework as the original. Similarly in Altered carbon this "memory" and "framework" is transfered to a blank mind in a "sleeve" creating another entity (we are agreed from the Brain death example that we don't consider the body to be "US" but the mind) in which "We" will carry on. I'm having a dilema in deciding if this is really US that gets transfered or a Copy that simply think's it's us. We ARE our minds, all else is merely a shell that our mind sits in (though i'm sure that said mind would have a hell of an ache if it ever woke up in another body.) If we could simply, through surgery lift our brains from our bodies, keeping it alive and move it to a new body or artificial construct, most of us would be happy to say that this is still us in a new shell. Now lets step it up a notch. At the end of the day if all we "are" is a collection of Memories written into an organic brain, a self written program, whilst we are ready to discard our "body" as a shell , then when you get the stage of discarding the physical mind it gets harder. Could we "transfer" the exact image, every chemical switch, every neuron, every memory, get the "image" into a new shell and still call this new entity "us". It would think as you and i do, feel (allowing for a difference based on certain chemical/physical input's being slightly different for the new shell) as you and i do and think that it was Me, it would have my memories and to this Image it would seem that it was in my body, went through the transfer phase then woke up in the new body, a continous existence from one shell to the next. Would this be Immortality? "You" would live on but i believe that "I" am simply the "program" or copy therof running on my own organic brain and that when that brain ceases to be i cease to be, to be aware, to know, even if a copy image lives on as me in a new shell and brain, it is a new life simply starting from where i left the stage as it where, as me. The fact that the "original" could be left in tact with any of the processes (teleportation or mind transfer) leaving you with 2 "you's" brings that home for me. Speaking of which, What about "teleportation" technolgy that destroys the original, this is the one that troubled me first many years ago and was quietly festering until i voiced the question on sci-forums. Even if it "converted" the original matter to energy and used the same energy to "make" the copy on the other side. The Copy would think it was you, have memories of leaving one point and arriving well and happy on the other, in one continous existence, but is this a "copy" that will go on as you whilst the original "you" has ceased to exist and think or feel, or is it really "you". The fact that there is no original to argue that it's not really you makes it easier to swallow but never the less. (the argument being that they need to "deconstruct" you to get all the "parts" correctly) There is also the argument from the Quantum sceintists that you cannot "observe" any given particle without altering that particle thus it would NEVER be possable to make an exact copy of your mind which defeats the entire point, the copy could have very minor differences due to a "change" in the brain image written on the other side because you "changed" the original mind when you scanned it (you used to hate marmite now you love it or you used to be sane now your not Smile) It seems to come down to, in my eyes that we are "trapped" in our own minds, and to keep the entity i call "myself" alive forever i need to keep my own copy in my own brain running for all time. But then again how many of you would be happy with the "alternative" immortality. Keeping a copy of you running indefineintly. Whilst the "you" you know (and probably love) would cease to be, a copy would continue to aquire experience, knowledge always being able to remeber and reference (as far as the human mind can) the experiences knowledge and memories of its "predecesors" creating what we always romantisise (Immortals, Vampires, gods etc) as a more, experienced, knowledgable, intuative and emphatic being (or of course as we are only human possably even more vain greedy and manipulative than any human prior could ever have been) This would really be the same as the Hereditary memory, passing our knowledge onto our children through our genes. At what point would the average human mind have filled itself with all the knowledge it could or would want to hold thus making the "copy" purely a vein or self indulgent act. If we ever created "teleportation" how many of you would be happy to use it when the "image" on the other side will come out believing it is you, have the memories that it stepped in one side out the other when it is possable that "IT" never stepped in at all, when its "possable" that "YOU" stepped in and where destroyed "IT" was created and think's it's you but "YOU" as you were, no longer exist or think. How many of you would think such an idea was rubbish and use it happily. How many would use it thinking that indeed "You" would cease to be but A "you" would be created to carry on where you left off so, if that was the only way a "You" would ever visit the new colony on Mars or further, you would do it. One another aside , if we ever do find a way to "alter" ourselves so that we pass on our "knowledge" to our children, would this be ethical? Would this be simply trying to copy an image of ourselves, our judgments our biases and our memories to a blank shell thus "destroying" or overwritting the basic program that was the life, and creating instead our own image (albeit the combined "mind" of both parents). Would we control "what" parts of our "selves" is transfered. Just the parts of the brain that deal with memories and knowledge. Parts that also deal with emotions so that we impart on the child a set of emotions to go with the memories. At what point are we passing on knowledege and at what point are we taking over the child and not allowing it to develope itself but Moulding it from birth. What would be the benefits and drawbacks of such a "race" where we impart upon our children the memories and learning of all its predecesors since birth. It would certainly create a new criteria for selecting mates with whom to have children. How would the children grow up, having memories or knowledge but not understanding, from birth. I've spread to too many questions now haven't I, Sorry i do that, I start on a subject then fly off on 100 tangents at once. Curious mind. Erm...if your still with me discuss the points that interested you most =p Sorry if this is a bit heavy, had to get if off my brain =p.
