If the brain was the machine that consciousness ran on, then it would make perfect sense to say that what we call a corpse is actually “a human who’s currently in shutdown mode”.
We don’t say that, nor do we think it. The brain depends on consciousness for its continued existence as a brain. Total shutdown of consciousness equals loss of one’s essential human-ness, not just a power failure or a software fault to be repaired.
Brain minus consciousness doesn’t equal brain. At least not in the same way that computer minus operating system equals computer. It just equals “some meat”. If I died, I don’t believe that even in principle we could install a copy of “you” to my brain and get it to work.
So, are you seeing this as infinitely diverging realities? With every new choice, or important choice, or death of an individual, a new reality is created?
I’m not challenging you here, I’m just looking for definition.
[I don’t accept reality as linear; I believe each consciousness is eternal, but develops over time; I appreciate that is a contradiction, given our current understanding of time. I don’t think our current scientific knowledge fully describes reality. However, I do like a logical argument, assuming “I don’t know” is an acceptable response.]
You’re correct that no one today possesses any evidence of any kind for what happens after death.
However, you cannot use physics as a magic wand when it’s convenient for your beliefs and reject it otherwise. If you cite the space-time model, then you must accept its consequences. One of them is that backwards time travel is not possible. You do not get to have it both ways.
But whether it is, or is not you, is exactly the thing up for debate in the hypothetical.
If we’re saying an identical brain to yours, is not you, then we can ask Why not? What is it lacking in order to be you?
We might say “bodily continuity” but there is no scientific reason we know of why that should matter. If we’re saying the mind is analogous to a program, then why are we not treating it as such here?
OTOH if we’re saying an identical brain to yours is you i.e. continuation of consciousness, then not only are we saying an afterlife is possible but we run into problems too. What if you duplicate my consciousness into multiple bodies at the same time; what would it mean to say I am all of them?
What if my consciousness is duplicated imperfectly? Given that there are only two binary alternatives between exist and not exist it seems the universe must draw an arbitrary line somewhere.
And so on. These are just a few of the problems.
If you’ve read the past threads, you’ll know I think there’s a third option, but it’s a pretty unpalatable one too.
I think we’re kinda like rain drops falling toward the ocean. Water evaporates and eventually the molecules concentrate to form an individual droplet. For a moment, it’s a distinct, unique, individual droplet. Once it hits the ocean or the earth below, its individual shape is no more, absorbed by everything else around it. It’s not gone, but it’s not what it once was. I think that’s kinda how I see what happens to us when this gig called life is up. Our physical self gets absorbed by everything around is in the physical realm, and our “soul” is absorbed by others around us every day.
Not sure if this is aimed at me, but depends on the simulation. If ‘we’ humans are doing the simulation then almost certainly every person and probably the animals too are digitized entities in the simulation. Maybe once you ‘die’ you just leave the simulation for another simulation, maybe you go to the ‘home’ simulation to hang out and perhaps go back in for another life at some other point down the road. Or, maybe I’m the only actual (digitized) person in this universe simulation and I play all the characters or it’s an ancestry simulation so I’m following the path of my presumed ancestors, so I get to play anyone related to me through history (many, that European invasion of the New World part was ROUGH! Damn Spanish). So, you are all just simulated AI’s here to make my experience more real.
I’ve had this thought before that I feel like I need to refine, but here goes.
Maybe when we die, we are reincarnated, but if that’s the case, it’s obvious that we don’t recall our previous existence(s). How would you know whether that’s true or not? That world would look exactly like the world we have now.
So maybe that is true, and after I die, that poor kid that’s born in some poor part of the world, is really me coming back. So you should treat him well.
We can make computer simulations that do all of the things you use to identify life (given you consider plants to have it). If we can use such behaviors to infer the existence of souls, then simulated entities have souls.
Keep that in mind the next time you play Mario Brothers.
I think a useful question to ask here is, what do you imagine ‘soul matter’ does?
Does it have a memory of events that have happened to it? It doesn’t appear to in the model you describe.
Does it cause bugs, trees, computer simulations and rockslides to behave as they do? In that case how is it distinguishable from physics?
Does it just allow you to take comfort in the fact that some part of you will go on after you die, even though that part carries nothing of your mind, memories, and identity? In that case why isn’t your physical matter sufficient to comfort you? It carries on after you die, becoming various kind of matter and component molecules.
If this soul thing controls or influences our behavior, then somewhere along the line it has to interact with “regular” matter/energy, right? And if it does that, then it’s not beyond the direct investigation of science. So sorry, that doesn’t work.
He’s basically saying the same thing you are: We are part of a complex system that has been evolving for billions of years. The universe started out simple, and one day will end simple. But somehow, in between those two extremes of entropy the universe became complex. Stars formed, then planets, then life, then intelligent life. The next level may be machine intelligence - who knows? But each one of us has a part to play in that evolution. The decisions we make, the activities we do, the children we raise, the things we write, the people we influence… All reverberate through time. Some of us make profound changes to the system, and others very little. But a million years from now, whatever that system looks like will have been determined in some small part by the actions of each one of us.
Furthermore, the ‘sacred’ part comes in by realizing that this system is utterly unique. It’s not just physics. It’s not a mechanistic universe - it’s a universe in which the mechanics are just part of this huge system which could not be predicted or replicated. It’s utterly unique to us, so what we do has permanent ramifications and are not just subject to random re-creation somewhere else. What we do actually matters, even after we’re gone.
Yes, the “old me” would be effectively dead from a practical standpoint. I understand that the matter would all be the same, but there would be no “I” there (or rather, a different one).
I think most people who interacted with me would agree: I wouldn’t know my family, be able to do my job, or have any of the social, technical, or literary interactions I did before. Responses to questions asked of me would be different. Every mental aspect of my life would be entirely different. You can (and it’s the SDMB – we will) quibble about what “different person” means, but I’m OK with saying that I’d be a different person at that point in a meaningful sense, even if the body is the same.
Consider the alternative case: we develop a technology that can exchange minds (no duplication or teleportation problems – the actual current electrical impulses just jump to the new brain, all memories are immediately re-written to match the source brain) between two people. If I (Bob) exchange brains with Alice, which one is Bob after the transfer? I’d argue that the meat-being we used to call Alice IS now Bob. Anything that I “want” Bob’s input on, I’m going to have to ask the Alice-meat for.
[Conscious but forgetting stuff] is a different kind of thing from [not conscious].
In a psychological fugue state, the person forgets everything. They (almost?) always remember later. They do go off and be a different person, temporarily.
