concerns about transhumanism

we all know that the human body is actually a biological machine and that almost every part can be replaced with mechanical alternatives.

my concern however is the brain if that is to be replaced then would our "being" or "identity" or whatever you call it not be replaced by something else ?
or even more simplified would it still be me ?

i suppose that in the case of baby's having some sort of Raid setup (2 hard drives in a pc having the same data) would still allow the "personality" to survive even if the biological brain dies.

but in the case of adults would that still work ?

if you have any links to articles about this topic could you please post some links to that ?

(ps. unfortunately i am drunk as i post this but it is a subject that has been bugging me for some time)

I always had my worries about having parts replacing my brain, specifically my cortex and such,... Would my consciousness go out? Can I put it in a hard drive or does it really only copy it into a hard drive and than lose the original (which in that case wouldn't the "original me" become dead?)?

After all wasn't the "consciousness in a hard drive idea" for immortality of one's consciousness? We really can't be sure I suppose because, in my knowledge, we don't have any or much mechanical things that one can put in a human brain or can either copy or transfer a consciousness from the brain.

I think you are confusing transhumanism with cybernetics. Whereas cybernetics could be said to be a transhumanist practice, transhumanism in itself is an ethos which states that we should strive to surpass ourselves and move beyond our biological restraints.

One example of a cybernetician is dr. Kevin Warwick.

well i see cybernetics as a logical continuation of transhumanism in practice.
and seeing how our biological components can only remain "fresh" for a certain time we will have to either die (unacceptable) or become entirely cybernetic.

Rather than cybernetics totally replacing the whole human body, couldn't technology be developed to keep sustaining and regenerating human cells and tissue? It would be the answer for this question.

I imagine that technological developments could keep our cybernetic components understated yet vital to our existence, yet the brain tissue which makes us 'us' will be maintained.

we all know that the human body is actually a biological machine and that almost every part can be replaced with mechanical alternatives.

my concern however is the brain if that is to be replaced then would our "being" or "identity" or whatever you call it not be replaced by something else ?
or even more simplified would it still be me ?

If mind is a product of the brain, and brain an entirely physical construct, then yes, a sufficiently advanced simulcra of the human brain would be functionally indistinguishable from from a purely organic one.

To somehow suggest that an artificial brain would somehow not be a "true" mind smacks of vitalism, a discredited hypothesis.

If anything, a cybernetic brain would be far superior to a purely organic brain, much in the same way that tools are far superior to bare hands.

but in the case of adults would that still work ?

It should do. Barring some sort of quantum component to human consciousness (a hypothesis I consider unlikely), it should be perfectly possible to take a snapshot of the "state" of an adult human brain and transfer it to other media.

I would like to know if we can transfer consciousness or just copy it...

Because if it can be known to be transfered (instead of copy and than replace the original one) perfectly than I would want a completely cybernetic brain!

If it can't be than I would just want cybernetic implants for my organic brain.

(all this transhumanism stuff reminds me of Deux Ex and Xenosaga games)

I would like to know if we can transfer consciousness or just copy it...

Because if it can be known to be transfered (instead of copy and than replace the original one) perfectly than I would want a completely cybernetic brain!

If it can't be than I would just want cybernetic implants for my organic brain.

(all this transhumanism stuff reminds me of Deux Ex and Xenosaga games)

that was my original point with this thread but you said it more clearly then i did.

well i see cybernetics as a logical continuation of transhumanism in practice.
and seeing how our biological components can only remain "fresh" for a certain time we will have to either die (unacceptable) or become entirely cybernetic.

Why would dying be unacceptable?

Though i do like the idea of moving beyond biological constraints, i think it would be very hard, if not impossible, to actually move beyond them without becoming, effectively, non-human.

Though i do like the idea of moving beyond biological constraints, i think it would be very hard, if not impossible, to actually move beyond them without becoming, effectively, non-human.

What do you mean by 'non-human'? Do you somehow consider the 'natural' human condition as 'sacred' or 'unviolable', so that technologically or genetically enhanced humans wouldbe worth less in your eyes?

What do you mean by 'non-human'? Do you somehow consider the 'natural' human condition as 'sacred' or 'unviolable', so that technologically or genetically enhanced humans wouldbe worth less in your eyes?

No, and i don't see how anyone could reach that conclusion based on what i said.

What i mean by non-human is a human being no longer that human being, i.e what is commonly defined as human. Where that line can be drawn cannot be known, but the dangers of tampering with how we evolved can also not be known.

Humans can do alot with their biologic background, why don't we start doing that first before we reach for something which evolved under repressed circumstances.

Why would dying be unacceptable?

Though i do like the idea of moving beyond biological constraints, i think it would be very hard, if not impossible, to actually move beyond them without becoming, effectively, non-human.

dying is unacceptable because it can be avoided via the application of technology.

and in my infinite hubris i can say that my body does not make my personality.
i can and want to go without it as soon as possible.

I would like to know if we can transfer consciousness or just copy it...

There's no difference!

By very definition it's the same. If counsciousness is copied and it changes, then it's not a perfect copy.

By very definition it's the same. If counsciousness is copied and it changes, then it's not a perfect copy.

Even if your consciousness is copied it does not mean that the copy is the same person as you. The copy is a different person and if you die you are dead.

Although the clone might be indistinguishable from you to all other people why should anybody wish to create that kind of copy? It is not a method to prolong one's life.

Of course it's the same person. What makes you who you are if not for your thoughts, memories, and consciousness? If you are clinically dead and then resuscitated, are you then a different person? All the matter in your body is replaced every so often by natural processes anyways (I think about every 7 years, although I could be wrong).

Of course it's the same person. What makes you who you are if not for your thoughts, memories, and consciousness?

Although the copy has the same thoughts, memories and consciousness he would not still be the same person. There would be two different persons although they would be indistinguishable.

Are you the same person as the copy which has another body and another identical brain? The copy is of course a different person. The situation would not change if you kill yourself. Other people might think that you are "immortal" because they could not tell the difference between the original person and the identical copy. But I don't see how this would benefit you.

By very definition it's the same. If counsciousness is copied and it changes, then it's not a perfect copy.

with consciousness we mean the "you" the person who is reading this post.
the "driver" that controls your body

even if we could make a perfect 1 on 1 copy of a person then we would only succeed in creating a copy instead of a transfer of consciousness (the mind is not being transferred to the new body)

i do not want a copy of myself to live on i want to be the one that is going to live as a transhuman.

This subject is actually getting quite interesting.

It seems the mind (or the "you") is separated from the body, in that you can copy the mind and place it in another vehicle/body but that person would still not be "you". "You" can, after all, not become two (people) at once, always one.

with the risk of getting way into the "geek-zone" its said that the transporter tech from star-trek has a similar problem namely the person being "transported" is actually copied and destroyed while the copy is just going to continue living the life of the now dead person.

i can not find anything dealing with this on the internet any suggestions ?

Although the copy has the same thoughts, memories and consciousness he would not still be the same person. There would be two different persons although they would be indistinguishable.

Are you the same person as the copy which has another body and another identical brain? The copy is of course a different person. The situation would not change if you kill yourself. Other people might think that you are "immortal" because they could not tell the difference between the original person and the identical copy. But I don't see how this would benefit you.

Your continuing to exist in the form of the information your natural brain contains, if transfered to a computer, wouldn't necessarily benefit you, you're right, just recreate you in another form the original 'you' couldn't control.
But say your brain was slowly replaced with better 'parts' as was needed over time... this would benefit you, because 'you' wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
(... I think... )

Your continuing to exist in the form of the information your natural brain contains, if transfered to a computer, wouldn't necessarily benefit you, you're right, just recreate you in another form the original 'you' couldn't control.
But say your brain was slowly replaced with better 'parts' as was needed over time... this would benefit you, because 'you' wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
(... I think... )

true gradual change to me seems the only viable way to go with the transformation of a biological being into a cybernetic one.

I think perhaps more information is needed on this subject... but I find it interesting.

For example, on our pursuit to create artificial life.. at what stage (if ever?) will these beings have a sense of "I", or a consciousness of their own? What part of our brain is it that contains this? Is it a single part, or a result of the brains dynamics as a whole? Or, perhaps it is something different entirely.

i suspect that it is the "whole being more then the sum of its parts" but according to people like ray kurzweil think it can happen in 25 years
read http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=memelist.html?m=4%23683

its absolutely fascinating what ray is saying.

i send an email to micheal annisimov from http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/?cat=5 what he thinks about this and i will post his email if he responds to it.

even if we could make a perfect 1 on 1 copy of a person then we would only succeed in creating a copy instead of a transfer of consciousness (the mind is not being transferred to the new body)

i do not want a copy of myself to live on i want to be the one that is going to live as a transhuman.

So kill your original self at the same time, problem solved. It's like when you 'move' a file from your hard drive to a disk. That's the same thing as copying it and destroying the original. Obviously if you copied your consciousness but kept the original body, there would be two people. But, they would start divergent paths only at that point and neither would have a greater claim to being the 'original' you.