Comment by kamaal | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kamaal | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This will open a big philosophical debate.

People whose limbs have been amputated, generally report of phantom limbs. They even experience sweating, itch etc on the phantom limb. Now how come the brain detects all that on a limb that isn't even present? It seems sense originates in the brain and the body parts are just acting mere like sensors and output peripherals.

If that is true you should not worry much about this biological body thing at all. After all we have organ transplants already. Like the argument about Ship of Theseus, you have to ask if a person who underwent organ transplants for more than one organ is actually the original person. If you were to wake that person post surgery, how much less of his original self he is since a good deal of body parts are replaced I am sure to bet he will say nothing changed at all.

Transferring brain to a computer is just brain transplant. If you accept organ transplant you should hardly have any problem with this at all.

I disagree, because the brain itself is the source of sentience and the only thing that really matters. The other organs all have a support role for the brain. Replacing those organs will of course not feel like there's any difference (unless they don't work correctly) because the source of a person's sentience is in the brain itself, not in those organs.

On the other hand, if there was a way to "digitalize" a brain and let it run in a simulation, it could still be conscious and have the same possibilities as the brain of a normal person with a normal body, but it would still be a duplicate of it. I don't think it's ever going to be possible to "transfer" yourself to a copy without dying. Sentience is far too intertwined with the physical aspect of the brain for it to be possible to transfer yourself into a copy without dying.

I share your viewpoint but I think there is a potential solution to this problem (not that I advocate doing it, treat it as a thought experiment): implant the blank slate hardware for the digital copy years before it takes over everyday operation and let it observe your brain to learn. Give the digital copy all the same inputs as the biological brain and make sure the (at first unused) continuous output of the digital copy matches true brain behavior to a desired level of error. Slowly assign control of the biological body to the digital copy over years of time -- somewhere in there "you" may have died but nobody will notice, including yourself. Then when the biological body dies, the digital copy will have already been "you" for quite some time and you're ready to be dropped directly into a mechanical body or a virtual world -- though those would also likely be gradual processes.

(I also think the underlying problem of thinking the digital copy isn't you may even be an illusory one in that our consciousness experiences a discontinuity every night when we go to sleep.)

  Transferring brain to a computer is just brain transplant. 
  If you accept organ transplant you should hardly have any   
  problem with this at all.

Your "uploaded" brain probably won't have any problem with this, but your original physical instance brain probably won't be too happy to have the lights turned off.

John Weldon's "To Be" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdxucpPq6Lc) kind of touches on this. It focuses on teleportation, but I think a brain upload is pretty much the same idea at heart.

I really don't get people who think consciousness emerges from an algorithm basically, that can be transferred to software.

If someone built a gigantic abacus and used to slowly simulate a brain, would that cause a consciousness to emerge?

If you're a materialist, yes, as far as I can tell simulating a brain or running any sort of equivalent software must cause consciousness to arise. Speed is not really part of the question. It's the shape of the computation that determines consciousness.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com