The argument that the OP hasn’t made a prima facie case strikes me as a nonstarter. On the one hand you have the practical/psychological problem: the OP is facing surgery and is scared. On the other you have the philosophical problem of continuity of identity and the mind–body problem. Stating that the OP hasn’t presented a case addresses neither of these. Psychological fear is unlikely to respond to claims about the burden of proof. The philosophical problem can easily be restated without reference to anesthesia or any specific set of facts. Since they don’t address either side of the OP, I think these posts come awfully close to threadshitting. (Slightly narrower arguments such as the lack of evidence for the OP’s beliefs about anesthesia are, however, on point.)
Irrational fear does not respond to logic.
All of the testimony and even a complete neuro-chemical description of anesthesia vs natural sleep will not have much effect.
FWIW: I have puberty-onset insomnia. I cannot fall asleep without some chemical. Since 2001, I have used nasty pills (benzodiazepines) to sleep. These are very close to the drugs used to induce anesthesia.
So far, I have woken up still me every time.
I have also been under general 3 times for surgery. Still here.
Now, for something completely different:
Suppose you really do re-boot and are different in some measurable way. So what? What changes? You still have the same daily routine, the same home, the same family, all of your memories are intact. Maybe now you can play piano? At the very least, you would be the center of attention for a spell - maybe hit the talk show circuit?
Why would you fear it? It sounds like a potentially fun trip?
Exactly.
I think you’re missing the point here. It’s not about whether you might wake up measurably different. It’s about whether someone else wakes up measurably identical to you. Imagine you wake up after anesthesia, only you’re not in your body. Instead, you’re floating at the top of the room, watching someone else wake up in your hospital bed. That person has your memories, your abilities, your thoughts. That person thinks that person is you. Only you know that person can’t be you, because you aren’t in the bed. You’re floating invisible in the air. You don’t know what is going to happen to you; maybe you will drift up to heaven; maybe you will rejoin your body; maybe you will simply dissolve into nothing, but in any case you know that at this moment you are not in your body, and someone else, even if someone identical, is.
Now imagine the same thing, except you don’t wake up hovering near the ceiling. You simply stopped existing. Again, the person who wakes up in bed thinks that that person is you. But you died, and unless you are looking down from heaven, there is no one who can tell the difference. Fun trip or not, you aren’t around to experience it.
Whether there are solutions to the problem or not, the problem (philosophically) exists. (Part of the solution, I think, is realizing that this could be happening every instant, an infinite number of times each second.)
Sorta like an old XKCD on Quantum Mechanics:
A: Suppose the String theory is correct and everything is composed of tiny strings!
B: OK, and what?
So everything is made of tiny strings. What conceivable difference does that make to life as lived by 99.999999999999999999999% of every person who ever lived? And 100% of every non-human life form?
What if Hinduism has it right and we are re-incarnations of some prior life form?
What if bodies get swapped between “souls” or however you characterize this disembodied “self”?
The answer to everything is NOT 42 - it is “So What”?
You didn’t reason your way into your fear, what makes you think anybody can reason you out of it?
Not if you were on the point of death when you went under.
I do not remember dreaming when I had major abdominal surgery but I do remember the surgeons talking over me, and the radio playing in the operating room.
Obviously the OP has taken this to heart and decided that the person who started this thread is a separate entity with no connection to his current being such as would cause him to check back in with us.
I recommend reading Greg Egan’s Permutation City. All will become very much less clear, but at least you’ll know why.
If you were cryogenically frozen for 1000 years and then brought back to life, would you be the same person? Would your current conscious state be the one in control of this newly resuscitated body, or would it be another person albeit with the same memories and mannerisms?
It’s the same issue.
Anyway, I hope that my consciousness doesn’t completely shut down. If it does, I’m pretty certain it will never come back but instead replaced by another. In any case, I’m undergoing the operation. Life sucks anyway, so it’s not a particularly big deal.
You have been reading too much WOO! There is no scientific evidence to support your claims.
Get your surgery done. And then go seek some psychological help.
Assuming such reanimation becomes medically possible in the future, I see no reason why you wouldn’t be the same person.
Back from where? Where do you think it’s going to ‘go’. What does ‘go’ even mean in this context?
From where? A new person will come into spontaneous existence? How is that not a violation of cause and effect?
If you were to teleport someone and found the teleporter malfunctioned, resulting in the person being teleported actually having their original body still in the teleporter but also having a new version of them successfully teleported. They are two different people despite being qualitatively identical. They have different tracks of thought and differing consciousness. Each will claim they are the original person. This brings up the question of what being “you” really means.
My theory is that if you were able to replace certain parts of the brain with mechanical circuitry and gradually replaced your entire brain in this fashion, piece by piece, that the psychological continuity that was maintained would still render you the same person and the same consciousness.
In general anesthesia, there is a cessation of this psychological continuity (or maybe not, I hope not) and your consciousness may well end up dying. When restarting, a new consciousness with a new trajectory arrives (albeit with the same memories etc). I believe this because I believe consciousness is an emergent property of the complex neuron activity in our brain, and not a property that our brain physically holds. It’s an abstract feeling of self-awareness that is unique only to you, but also a fragile one that can disappear under certain philosophical hypothetical situations, like the teleporter example.
Why do you keep saying this when so many people have told you it’s false? It’s nothing like a theoretical transporter. Your brain has not been shut down. It does not have to be restarted. All you do is wake up.
Exactly; it’s far more like a computer that is in standby mode, but still powered on, than like a computer that has been shut down cold, and has to reboot by reading a BIOS from a ROM chip, then read an OS kernel from a disk, etc.
Even in the slumber of surgical anaesthesia, our brains are functioning. Brain waves continue cycling and can be detected. Neurological activity ceases only once, ever, in anyone’s existence, and that is the (current) definition of death.
Agreed, a duplicating transporter would force us to redefine words like “identity” and “self” and “same.” We already have some of those issues in a paperless society regarding documents. What is the “original” of an e-document? If I email you a text file, and you email it back to me, and I forget to label them, which one is the “original” and which is the “copy?”
I don’t believe ‘psychological continuity’ is a different thing from cause and effect, and that if causes could be completely transcribed and replicated (they can’t - so the teleporter thought experiment can never become reality), their effects would be the qualitatively the same effects regardless when and where they are resumed.
Really, you seem to be saying there’s some mysterious additional stream of something like physical cause and effect, but not physical.
It’s a very nice picture, but it doesn’t support anything you’ve said in this thread.
People were saying how there’s not a huge difference between sleep and anesthesia.
It might help if you actually tried to use words to explain how you think that illustration relates to your argument.