Shengji wrote:It most absolutely is! I've rarely seen such a constructive thread on any topic, let alone one along these lines. When Flowerchild see's how the thread went in his absence I think he'll be quite proud that his little community contains such a high proportion of intelligence and maturity :)
Ok, so back on topic, I'd like to explain why I feel personality is more of a function of the soul than the chemistry of the brain. In doing so, I'll have to go back 3 years or so to a time when my beliefs were very similar to MoRmEnGiL's***
***Please don't think I'm getting on my high horse and saying "I used to believe what you did but then I grew up", if anything I feel like "I used to hold independent views based on my love and passion for science then I turned into the type of person who I used to be see so clearly as wrong! What I'm trying to say is that I'm not dismissing MoRmEnGiL's point of view because I have moved on from it, in fact the opposite is true!
So anyway, three years ago or thereabouts I fell pregnant and this triggered the biggest change in beliefs that I've ever had in my life! To put it in perspective, my first degree was in theoretical physics and my second in biomedical science - I'm a scientist through and through! I was fully aware at how much change happens in the brain of a foetus from the start of it's development to the neonatal stages and even then from neonate (first week after birth) through to 1 years old, the brain changes at an astonishing rate - unrecognisable from day to day! However, from the first time I felt him move to this very day, his personality has remained consistent! How can his personality be affected by the neural network and chemistry of his brain if it can change so much and yet not affect his personality?
So I became a firm believer in a soul, although I still cannot for the life of me pin down what one really is, this is where the preformed beliefs come in I suppose. So looking at how we can solve the death problem, I said that we would need to maintain the same material that the brain is created from because quite frankly as we don't properly understand how the brain does everything it does, it would seem to be an error to believe that they can just be replaced with a completely different way of forming a neural network and expect it to work properly - Perhaps one day we will understand every possible reason why the cells that make up the brain need to be exactly how they are and then we could engineer a synthetic solution, but I put forward the theory that part of that understanding will involve a scientific understanding of the soul and the way it binds to our brains.
So to me the obvious way to attempt immortality is to trick the body into growing fresh brain cells (and of course every other cell in the body) using technology to manipulate stem cells. I do think that by encouraging the brain to do things it was not designed to do like this kind of rapid regeneration will lead to unforeseen problems and I whole heartedly believe that should such advancements become commonly available, outside of the trial and error that will occur with potentially horrendous results, people regenerating themselves in this fashion, certainly in the early times of doing this will change after their first treatment.
I think we will get to the point where people can live forever and it will likely be a good combination of cybernetics, stem cell tech and nano tech. I think by doing so we will learn a lot about the soul and potentially create an entirely new branch of science and another new frontier to explore. Certainly exciting times, however I maintain my belief that we need to keep the birth rate up no matter what is happening with the death rate in order to maintain humanities ability to adjust to a changing universe.
I'm with you, I'd love to see every mystery that the universe has to offer, but then, as others have pointed out - we can't make assumptions on what happens after death because at the moment we have no way of conducting any scientific research on the subject. I think one day we will be able to but until then to assume that death precludes you from experiencing any more is a theory which may not be correct!
EDIT: And just to conclude, I'd like to say that I really don't see a problem with making assumptions, holding preformed beliefs and having a religious point of view, especially if they are a comfort of bring some other positivity into your life - anything to help in this crazy world! However that comes with the caveat that one is prepared to abandon those views should a better theory or view come along.
Just to get my last word in, after being *hum* busy *hum* with my girlfriend most of the weekend.
I think, actually, that your point above, about your son's personality not really changing despite the astounding changes in his brain, proves that the soul is not bound to any particular part of the brain. Thus any part of it could theoretically be replaced by a synthetic equivalent, as long as that equivalent matches the requirements for the soul to continue. And I don't think we're anywhere close to understanding the brain well enough for this. Though we might be closer than you think - the rate of change in science and technology will probably only increase going forward. There is also an easy experiment (if we can get computers fast enough) to test if "any old neural network" simulating a human brain can develop a personality. Build one. ;) And yes, it will always be possible to say "the AI might act human, but it has no soul", but who are we to judge the existence of the soul in question? After all, we have no evidence one way or another that souls even exist in the first place.
Certainly exiting times! I agree that "new blood" will always be needed, even though we can get around the tendency for human brains to stagnate with age. I guess we'll just have to spread out among the stars to find space for us all. Oh, bother... ;)
