LWTK: Cryonics and your soul

[Taylor]

I said without assuming you have a soul Taylor...

Sorry mate, I'd elaborated a bit more in the edit.

The original being destroyed means you are neither, or else you'd still be the orginal. Assuming of course you find it easier to transmit a data stream of particle locations and interactions rather than the particles themselves, ie. beaming up scotty compared to taking the lift.

[Taylor]

Then you would be both, not in a linked consciousness sort of way, but since you have the same memories you would both think you are the initial you (which movie did I see this in?).

The Sixth Day. Arnold movie about cloning?

Dots under the eyelid to show which "generation" clone they were?

[Kryzaach]

Very nice argument, Saint, from a linguistic sense.

I suppose that might be a comfort as yourselves battle to the death.

[Kryzaach]

Sorry mate, I'd elaborated a bit more in the edit.

The original being destroyed means you are neither, or else you'd still be the orginal. Assuming of course you find it easier to transmit a data stream of particle locations and interactions rather than the particles themselves, ie. beaming up scotty compared to taking the lift.

If you can recreate all the conditions of the original arrangement, there is no lost information. By saying that you are destroyed at the outset implies that we are more than the sum of our parts, that some non classical information is present in our interpretation of self and ergo, you are arguing for the existence of a soul.

[Shady7/8]

I support Taylor's hypothesis on this one. Every digital teleport will be a copy.

As for becoming a corpsicle... there will always be cell decay no matter what temperature, regardless of cryoprotectants.
In my understanding and previous readings on the topic through theoretical sciences, it is possible... but I think we have decades if not more of research before we hit a viable solution, plus we need a lot of guinea pigs and locations that can bypass suicide and euthanasia laws. I don't think Cryo will be a viable solution in our life times, much as I want to see an interstellar future.
Can you imagine the multiple redundancy systems required to ensure that the corspicles are kept in a live/dead state in case of emergency?
As for the actual question posed... Providing the neural pathways are maintained and kept trickling away then yes I beleive you will maintain your 'being'. Else you become just become a vegetable when thawed.

Also as mentioned... yes why would the state or the business resurect your body to find out your US$20M you locked away for the future is worth nothing as the US no longer exists or is in the same financial state as Zimbabwe. The legal battles of heirs fighting for your stored fortune? The cost of retraining you to understand the science of thefuture?
For the sake of travelling stellar and interstellar distances I'd say yes... the above issues are negated.... however these ideas are not on the plans in anyones space itineraries yet.

[Taylor]

If you can recreate all the conditions of the original arrangement, there is no lost information. By saying that you are destroyed at the outset implies that we are more than the sum of our parts, that some non classical information is present in our interpretation of self and ergo, you are arguing for the existence of a soul.

Good point, I bow my head in shame. I'll start speaking creationist.

I believe that if you can turn the very matter than makes up a human being into energy and transmit that energy to be recreated, then the human is the same and there will only be the energy to create the matter for that one human. If the particles are turned into data, the particles are no longer relevant, so the parts are scattered but I see your point. If every particle is in the exact same place, you should have two equal people, regardless of what or how they were scanned, moved then put back together.

My own cognitive reality doesn't allow for the coexistence of myself, it is convenient to say that I am destroyed in one place and an exact copy of me is created in another. The reality of the clone wouldn't account for coexistence either, so his perception should be seamless, so the observable flow of consciousness is seamless.

[Shady7/8]

Assuming we are just the sum of our parts and we have the technology to reconstruct things on the most fundamental level..

Assuming we are just the sum of our parts implies we are less than sentient...
which would follow we couldn't have the technology to 'teleport'

But to humour your question properly...
If we were broken down into our constituent atoms and reconstructed at the end, then in my understanding no, we wouldn't be the same. The electrical fields creating the neural pathways networks etc would be broken, or if not broken intermixed/confused/invirulated with electrical fields in a the 'teleport' process.
Even if you could store an image of the neural net and recreate it at the end it's still a copy.
HOWEVER - to the new creation - yes you should be you. But there's noone to tell you otherwise and in the creation of a duplicate stream I think the world would end... the world can barely contain one fo me!

[Kryzaach]

Assuming we are just the sum of our parts implies we are less than sentient...
which would follow we couldn't have the technology to 'teleport'

How does this imply that at all?
We have a pretty good understanding of the physical makeup of the brain, and afaik it doesn't involve anything that would be describable as magic...

But to humour your question properly...
If we were broken down into our constituent atoms and reconstructed at the end, then in my understanding no, we wouldn't be the same. The electrical fields creating the neural pathways networks etc would be broken, or if not broken intermixed/confused/invirulated with electrical fields in a the 'teleport' process.

I foresaw such a statement, which is why I said in my original post "reconstruct things on the most fundamental level". This statement implies perfect replication. No interference, no chance, nothing uncontrollable etc.


Edit: Sorry for hijacking your thread Lozzle.. I didn't think this was worth it's own thread and it's fairly related. For what it's worth, I reckon, provided brain death doesn't occur, freezing won't do too much to fuck you up(provided comprehensive unfreezing tech exists when it comes around to thaw time).

[Shady7/8]

If you/we have a pretty good understanding, then please explain how we are different to the animals?
What seperates us in the sentience level?

And to reply to the second part - fair call you did specify that.

HOWEVER - to the new creation - yes you should be you. But there's noone to tell you otherwise and in the creation of a duplicate stream I think the world would end... the world can barely contain one of me!

[Taylor]

Sentience will need to be very specifically defined to have that conversation.

If it's just knowing you are yourself: "I think, therefore I am." then I've seen chimps recognise themselves in mirrors, realise their hair was dyed a stupid colour and get upset trying to brush it off.

Is that all that's required?

[Professor Redfern]

It wont matter for me, My soul left the day I got my first R1.

The poor bastard couldnt keep up.

[Kryzaach]

^

[Bendito]

^ We are animals, just smart ones that can talk, invent iPhones etc

[Taylor]

^ We are animals, just smart ones that can talk, invent iPhones etc

There's a pretty clear trend that the strongest, fittest and most prone to violent massacre of all rivals breed more in nature.

Do you think animals feel self conscious? Are they able to recognise that they are not prime mating material and feel bad about it?

Do they display any self initiated exclusion behavior?

[Kryzaach]

HOWEVER - to the new creation - yes you should be you. But there's no-one to tell you otherwise and in the creation of a duplicate stream I think the world would end... the world can barely contain one of me!

As to this, yep, I read it the first time, but it doesn't actually answer the second question, so I didn't requote it.

For what it's worth, I've run through this, and many other nature of self type questions over the last few decades and recognise that this is a singularity.

I was really just wondering if anyone else had broken their brain on it, and perhaps thought of something I missed.

[Shady7/8]

Not yet...
Same as you it drifts through the brain, but the scenario you propose is as probable as Michael Jackson fathering children.
The only way I can see a true recreation of self would be through use of rifts in space, if such were to be true or located.
But no matter what way I've reviewed it, in the process of breaking you down for the conversion to transmittal stage you as a person would disappear.
Although as it stands we have no understanding of what makes us 'us' or unique. So there's no way to accuratly debate what happens to the 'me' part of the body in this process.

[Kryzaach]

But no matter what way I've reviewed it, in the process of breaking you down for the conversion to transmittal stage you as a person would disappear.

That still implies a soul like mechanism.
If you cannot directly copy something, destructive process or no, that is indicative of the fact that there is something more to it than physical makeup.

Although as it stands we have no understanding of what makes us 'us' or unique. So there's no way to accuratly debate what happens to the 'me' part of the body in this process.

The second question I asked begins well beyond that, already assuming that this is possible and therefore, we do not have "souls".

[Shady7/8]

I think your first point there is flawed. So we state unequivocally that this is all purely theoretical and not based on known science or much fact :p
Sure. You are the exact same person after the transition as before
And two recreations can co-exist in holy matrimony whilst smelling like purple :p
But seriously...
You cannot make a perfect re-creation... by definition it is not the original. If we assume you can, as you propose, make an exact perfect recreation then by that same statement it is identical, and therefore yes you would have the same sense of self.
But at the same time if they were able to recreate you, how could you know the difference? The original you no longer exists to disagree - everything you know is correct as far as you can analyse.

Stepping along to your next question if two were made.... they are both you, but as above, not you as they are copies of you wouldn't be fair though...

brain starting to need tequila to continue this conversation.....

[Lozzle]

I wish my work day wasn't so interrupted that I could sit peacefully and make sense of everything above.

[D'Artagnan]

I don't know about the 'soul' thing but I know that many virus strains cannot withstand sub-zero temps for very long and have often pondered that if I contracted HIV, would I, as a last resort, go through this process as a means of killing the infection?

So snap freeze, virus dies, revive soon after? Hell if you're about to die of a serious infection, wouldn't you try?

/backontopic

D'Art