I'm not a scientist.
If you could copy all the memories and brainwaves into an artificial body, would your "soul" be transferred to that body?
Is the conscious mind simply your brain? Or is it a summation of all your body?
>>878610
You have to prove it's not a philosophical zombie. Good luck with that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie
The human brain does not operate on binary logic like a computer
You cannot transfer a brain into a computer
Stop taking science fiction so seriously
>>878641
>what makes us conscious
Proper functioning of our brains in a specific pattern that results in self-awareness
>is consciousness our soul
There is no such thing as a soul and I honestly feel sorry for you if you believe in this nonsensical shit
>>878610
This is really more of a /sci/ question.
>>878653
Then why can't our consciousnesses be transferred into something else?
This seems like circular logic.
>>878667
Because the human brain does not operate on binary logic.
>>878670
What about quantum processors?
>>878641
Will transfering our memories and brainwaves to a computer produce the equivalent sensation of qualia in the computer?
>>878675
The human brain doesn't operate on base-4 binary logic either.
>>878700
Machines might theoretically become conscious in their own unique way, but it is unlikely to ever resemble human consciousness is the point.
>>878620
logic is universal, its merely information and nothing else we use it because our brains have the ability to do so.
therefore in a in a biomechanical system comprised by a neuron network in which electricity flows -------- one day there might be a way to reproduce the flow of electricity in a machine that completely imitates a person's reasoning and personality. memories are just patterns in that electricity that our brains can reproduce.
>DEUS EX MACHINA
>>878700
They might become intelligent but whether they have qualia or not you will never know it.
>>878711
Interesting, so you are implying animals aren't self aware? Does "consciousness" only apply to humans?
Sorry if you think I'm trolling, I'm not.
>>878691
I see no reason why the processes of the human brain could not be closely imitated by a sophisticated program. Admittedly this would be an approximation but it could be so close we would not notice the difference
>>878716
Doing so would require creating a computer that would be able to simulate the physical laws of our reality on a perfect 1-to-1 ratio.
Which is impossible. Even the most advanced NASA computers are capable of only the roughest approximations.
>>878728
The vast majority of animals are not self-aware (with a few exceptions like dolphins), doesn't mean they aren't sapient.
>>878737
Define awareness please.
>>878750
Having a concept of one's being, the "self" - what psychologists would call the "ego"
>>878762
Hmmm, I am going to think about this. Thank you.
Read philosophy of mind don't go to /his/ for easy answers.
>>878700
I don't think anyone is doubting that a machine can be conscious. After all, we're biological machines. What I've read is people oppose to that Turing machines can't be conscious.
>>878737
you went completely off the track, and maybe missed the "THERE MIGHT BE".
humam consciousness is merely a process in the working of a larger system, the humam brain, which is constantly changing in morphology through the neurons that die or form new synapses.
reproducing it has nothing to do with the fuken "physical laws of our reality".
> it all comes down to INFORMATION AND ITS PROCESSING: input, external stimulae, and the respective output of such system - decision making.
>>878784
not yet at least, without a doubt
>>878785
>reducing the human brain to the interaction of neurons
Except that's not correct either.
The human brain is a biochemical machine. Take out all of the neurotransmitters, and you don't have a functioning brain anymore. It's not "just" neurons. It's not "just" logic. It's not "just" chemicals. Its an entire holistic system where if you take out even one thing the entire thing comes crashing down like a house of cards. The whole is more than the sum of its parts nigga.
>>878670
binary logic can simulate neuronal networks
human brain is a neuronal network
>>878796
muh nigga, good answer, i cant prove you wrong
BUT i disagree for i believe that UNTIL NOW, everything we have ever seen or touched was energy in motion in a boundless chemical reaction inside a seemingly infinite space, and with that being said i believe NOTHING is more than the sum of its parts - its a logic thing dont even argue
"nothing is created only transformed" - Lavoisier
>>878617
>You have to prove it's not a philosophical zombie.
not really. I mean you can't prove anyone's not a philosophical zombie.
>>879091
>implying a simple brainscan won't when we discover the exact mechanism
>>878620
You can reproduce neural networks on computers.
>>878737
>be able to simulate the physical laws of our reality on a perfect 1-to-1 ratio
Why would you want that? Just abstract a few laws that describe how brains work then apply that. Like, if you want your computer to model the movement of celestial bodies, you don't have to punch in quantum physics too. Yeah, quantum is supposed to be more fundamental, but it's not relevant at the scale you want to work at.
>>878762
They just call it self.
Psychoanalysts called it Ego. The ones that are still alive fart dust.
