<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 25 Apr 2020 at 20:32, Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 25/04/2020 00:36, Jason Resch wrote:<br>
> According to mechanism (the idea that the brain is a machine and that <br>
> consciousness is merely a product of this machine's operation), then:<br>
> 1. survival of consciousness beyond the death of a body,<br>
> 2. reincarnation,<br>
> 3. the ability for the consciousness to travel to other universes, and<br>
> 4. the distinction between the body and the consciousness are direct <br>
> consequences.<br>
><br>
> Mechanism holds that consciousness results from the operation of a <br>
> machine (the brain). Therefore, consciousness is the result of a <br>
> pattern of behaviors, not the underlying physical material or matter. <br>
> If a body dies, you could use a different pile of matter to rebuild <br>
> that machine and recover the consciousness. The consciousness then <br>
> would survive beyond the death of any particular incarnation (body) <br>
> and could reincarnate into new bodies. The analogy is similar to the <br>
> notion of a story surviving the destruction of one copy of it in a <br>
> book. The book, like the body, is just one particular token, <br>
> representing a type (the story). But the type can exist as many <br>
> different tokens.<br>
><br>
> Most scientists and philosophers of mind ascribe to mechanism. <br>
> Consciousness then is an informational pattern, not matter or energy. <br>
> Consciousness has no mass, definite location, nor is it bound to the <br>
> confines of this universe like the matter is. If in another universe <br>
> someone recreated on a computer the same patterns the atoms in your <br>
> brain here follow, then according to mechanism (what nearly every <br>
> scientist will tell you) your consciousness would be recreated in that <br>
> other universe.<br>
><br>
> So here we have your "soul"--if you will call it that, surviving the <br>
> death of the body, reincarnating into new bodies unassociated with the <br>
> matter, and even leaving the universe to exist in some physically <br>
> inaccessible realm.<br>
><br>
> You may object that in practice we never re-create brains in such a <br>
> way to enable reincarnation or allow the consciousness to survive the <br>
> death of the body, but I disagree. The many worlds of quantum <br>
> mechanics provides exactly the form of duplication necessary, and <br>
> results in your consciousness travelling to now physically inaccesible <br>
> corners of reality. Secondly, if a dying brain approaches zero <br>
> information content, it results in there being a singular state (the <br>
> consciousness of zero information). If this conscious state is <br>
> identical in content to a newly forming brain in a womb, then this <br>
> provides a mechanism of reincarnating into a new body. Then there is <br>
> also the simulation hypothesis, where you are a descendent, or jupiter <br>
> brain, or advanced alien playing sim human, and when you awaken from <br>
> this game/dream/life you will find yourself in an "immaterial" <br>
> (simulated/VR) realm where you are free to play "Sim Martian" or have <br>
> any life of any mortal being you choose.<br>
><br>
> Or, if this is too much, you might just say when your dead that's it. <br>
> (but then you need to find an alternate theory of consciousness which <br>
> prohibits these possibilities).<br>
><br>
<br>
Your terminology is more suggestive of supernatural concepts than <br>
scientific ones, but I see what you're getting at. However, you seem to <br>
be ignoring the vital role of matter and energy in implementing <br>
information. There's no such thing as information without matter and/or <br>
energy. There's no such thing as a mind without a brain.<br>
<br>
I do say that when you're dead, that's it. In the absence of some <br>
intervention to record, transfer and restore the information in the <br>
brain. I'm saying nothing about other universes or quantum physics, I'm <br>
not qualified to, but in this universe, in the macroscopic world we're <br>
all familiar with, it seems that minds are produced by the functioning <br>
of brains. If we can reproduce the functions exactly, as you say, we <br>
have reproduced the mind. That doesn't mean that if a brain is <br>
destroyed, the mind isn't also destroyed. The things you are calling <br>
'reincarnation' (I really don't like using that term, for the reason <br>
above) can indeed happen, but only if someone does something to achieve <br>
it. Absent that, you're dead, Jim.<br>
<br>
Some people dispute this, quoting things like the holographic universe <br>
theory, but again, I'm not qualified to comment on that, and I certainly <br>
wouldn't want to rely on it.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What Jason is saying is, in my view, quite rational, but using words such as "soul" will make some people assume it's mumbo jumbo.<br></div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">Stathis Papaioannou</div></div>