Veeky Forums will argue that going to sleep and having your mind transferred into a computer while being killed are...

Veeky Forums will argue that going to sleep and having your mind transferred into a computer while being killed are different things.

this this xdddThis.
This. this.

What

Woah there fella. I think you're missing a few definitions in your statement.

Lol, the transfer would just be a copy, you'd still be asleep ;)

You must be really really really dumb if you can't understand that simple chart without having it explained in detail

If you're going to make the claim that sleeping, transferring your brain into a computer, and dying are all the same thing, you're gonna have to explain in detail

Im sorry but your chart sucks

But what about the soul, how do you propose we copy that?

in science you're not allowed to not define things, that's pseudoscience

Explain to me the difference between having your mind transferred into a computer without you dying and having your mind transferred into a computer while being killed other than that you die.

I don't believe that would place literally me into the computer but rather would just create a copy of me into the computer for the sole purpose of making sure that something that thinks like me is still around after my death. That is something I do not care about.

objective prove that when you wake up you're the same individual

There's no such thing as "transfer" of digital information retard. The data is deleted in the original place and written in the destination. You would be killed and the copy, not you, not your perspective, would resume your life. Other people wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but you would, cus you'd be dead.

Define "mind".

assuming a self even exists, it relies on the causal properties of the brain, and even in sleep you aren't fully unaware. the same memories, assumptions, and faculties are there, they just aren't in your conscious field, as Searle puts it. not sure a "self" even exists though.

Using your logic, when you go to sleep, what wakes up is a copy of you

If you are dead, you can't tell the difference.

Also

It doesn't matter if "the self" exists. You can simulate a biological mind using electrological impulses. If you can feel, then so can the electrological brain, since both are performing the same operations.

>You can simulate a biological mind using electrological impulses

prove it

The universe is either deterministic or probabilistic
The brain is part of the universe
Therefore the brain is deterministic or probabilistic

We can simulate deterministic AND probabilistic models
The brain is a deterministic or probabilistic model
Therefore we can simulate the brain

>implying consciousness is deterministic
>Implying you can deny dualism
>implying consciousness is an epiphenomenon
>implying mind is determined by electrical impulse

Just because something is logically possible doesn't make it naturally possible. are you that retarded that think that using logic you can prove a phenomenon? You cannot even define mind properly and now you think that mind is made of matter, do you even know what is the hard problem of consciousness? Go back to school kiddo.

>implying consciousness is deterministic
"or probabilistic"

>Implying you can deny dualism
"dualism is a view about the relationship between mind and matter which claims that mind and matter are two ontologically separate categories"
Tell me more about how your brain violates the laws of the universe and it's made of a magical something that is found nowhere else. Also please tell me when was that magic something coded into your DNA, and at which point in evolution it happened.

>implying mind is determined by electrical impulse
It doesn't matter if it's electrical or not. It is within the universe, therefore it can be simulated.

>tell me more about how your brain violates the laws of the universe

so, you know all the laws of the universe, super smart kiddo. search about ITT (Information integration theory) and supervenience.

maybe we can simulate it but not with your assumptions.

I will not waste my time with you. Read first about this subject, you are making lots of philosophical mistakes and I don't have time to educate you. bye.

I am not making any mistake:

- DNA codifies your body
- DNA are instructions to arrange matter
- Those instructions form a consciousness
- Therefore a consciousness is made of matter
- Matter obeys the laws of the universe

>I don't have time to educate you. bye.

aka "I got BTFO"

>supervenience
>If two persons are indistinguishable in all of their physical properties, they must also be indistinguishable in all of their mental properties.

lmao, that's even more deterministic than what I proposed

also wrong, because if the universe is probabilistic, then two identical systems can decay into different states

>- Therefore a consciousness is made of matter
>that's even more deterministic than what I proposed
lol
and I am sure that you are a "special kiddo" who thinks that a 4 minutes lecture give you enough information about this complicated topic. ITT and supervenience are talking about panpsyquism, which talks about everything is made of consciousness, even atoms, and consciousness is something different from matter, it is made of "something else" and the level or grade of consciousness depends in the way that this matter gather or integrate. So, consciousness is not matter, properly.
If you say that consciousness is just matter you are basically denying free will and your personal experience of the world is just an illusion (ephiphenomenon).

Therefore
This demonstrate that you don't have this philosophical problems solved.

I hope this helps you to understand how far are you to see the whole picture about this subject. anyway, have fun with your "super smart 4 minutes lecture" to understand this difficult topic. Bye kiddo.

In a scientific sense, "Your mind" is not a well-defined thing.

panpsyquism is a poor man's hypothesis at best

no worth any serious consideration

>everything is made of consciousness, even atoms
>consciousness is something different from matter, it is made of "something else"
>the level or grade of consciousness depends in the way that this matter gather or integrate.
>So, consciousness is not matter, properly.

So you redefined consciousness to mean something else entirely. We were talking about simulating a human brain. That's what was understood by consciousness.

>A is made of B
>B is not made of A, it's made of C
>the level of B that A possesses depends on the way A is arranged
>so, B is not A, properly

From here, I can say that I can arrange A (matter) in an equivalent way and it will have the same level of B (consciousness)

So even if all you said is true, I am still right

>So even if all you said is true, I am still right
so this conversation is because you want to be right? how old are you? as I said here >maybe we can simulate it but not with your assumptions.

see? talking with you is a waste of time.

yes, I think that even Chalmers doesn't swallow it completely.

Consciousness doesn't entirely cease during sleep, it's just very low level.

>not preserving continuity of thought
>shiggydiggy
E G O
G
O
B R I D G E
R
I
D
G
E

>maybe we can simulate it but not with your assumptions

It doesn't matter if everything is made of "consciousness" (whatever that means). No retarded philosophical theory with no empirical evidence whatsoever changes this simple fact:

- the human brain is a system within the universe
- it can be replicated with an equivalent system within the universe

Being able to replicate a mind doesn't mean you're transferring the original

>replicated with an equivalent system
>system
and now you are talking like a gentlemen, without that «consciousness is matter» assumption.

If the replica is perfect, the product will think like you do, have your memories, your feelings, your tendencies, your logic. From the point of view of the replica, 10 seconds ago it was a person of flesh, and now somehow woke up somewhere else (a robotic body, a new body, whatever).

So there would be two you's now. If we kill the first you instead of waking it up, that problem is solved.

Right. But the originals' perspective is that it just went to sleep and never woke up. The clone would be happy, but if you were the original it is no different from just dying.
I suppose if you're smart this is valuable to society, but from a selfish perspective of living forever, it accomplishes nothing.

What makes you thing consciousness is not matter? I agree that it makes some sense that its not matter, and its a nice idea, but we have no reason to believe that the phenomena of consciousness isn't just a byproduct the the matter inside brains

No, from your perspective you went to sleep and woke up somewhere else.

You are now the clone.

Sleep or not is irrelevant. Your mind still exists while you are asleep.

Why would I argue with that? It's obviously true.

Some days I wake only to go back to sleep a few minutes later.

You all do it too.

what if you don't kill the original? Are you simultaneously 2 people?

pretty much this

the copy gets into the computer

you don't

Not the same guy but being something is different from being the product of something, no doubt that consciousness emerges from complex structures, but can you tell me how complex one structure must be to give rise to conscious experience, and why in particular that inferior limit accounts for subjective experience and not a less complex structure?

Yes.

Ever heard about the special connection between twins?

Well, imagine how potent that connection can be if you were literally the same for decades.

You would probably predict everything your clone does / thinks. And while you won't be in control, you will have the illusion that you sort of are.

It's gradual.

Einstein > You > Average Westerner > Australian Aboriginals > Chimpanzees > Dolphins > Pigs > Dogs > Cats

There are different degrees of consciousness.

Sigh I wish human cloning was made public. I bet they experience all kinds of fucked up things together. Like same dreams or even deja vu of the same things.

and yet, if i stab a twin in the heart the other doesn't collapse with him. They still have separate experiences

Yes, it's an illusion that there's a physical connection. The illusion is the byproduct of two wholly complex systems that are basically the same. Then again, consciousness is also an illusion.

see
Consciousness, as far as we know is just the sum-total of electrical impulses.
Its the same as a severed fish tale continuing to flop around. It's as simple as electricity still causing muscle contractions.

but being basically the same doesn't mean they're connected.
So you're suggesting that there is some sort of collective consciousness between the 2?

What about a protein, atom structure, subparticles interactions, do you think a kind of primitive consciousness could emerges from those structures, or just from the neocortex? If only the neocortex, what is special about its complexity that allows it to gives rise to consciousness?

When I upload myself I'll replace pieces of my brain with a networked version until I'm completely virtual, ship of theseus style

not him, but i assume he would define it as having at least 1 synapse. Having at least one chemical messenger and receiver.

It must be a continuum, with consciousness levels very low, very high, and anywhere in between. Consciousness isn't binary, check your privilege

Yeah I agree with you