The Philosophy Discussion Forum

I've already said that cognition is an embodied process and not a simple function of brain state and if you won't take my word for it then study the subject for thirty years as I have. Save the ignorant insults and answer a simple question. Some of the most powerful and evocative stimuli for a human mind are purely chemical in nature. How would you upload the memory evoked by a particular smell which reminds you of an event in your childhood?

Obvious Leo wrote:I've already said that cognition is an embodied process and not a simple function of brain state and if you won't take my word for it then study the subject for thirty years as I have. Save the ignorant insults and answer a simple question. Some of the most powerful and evocative stimuli for a human mind are purely chemical in nature. How would you upload the memory evoked by a particular smell which reminds you of an event in your childhood?

Yes, and because it is an embodied process, that is exactly why it can be replicated materially DUH. at the molecular level.
If you had read what I said more carefully you would have seen that.

Now, either go back and read what I said more carefully, or run along and do your homework.

You're missing the point, Hobbes. The neural network extends into every single cell of the human body, of which there are trillions. What the f*** is it that you propose to upload?

Perhaps you might like to try something a little less ambitious and explain how you'd go about uploading a bacterium onto a computer. This is something I also regard as impossible but if you've got some insights unknown to science I'd love to hear about them.

Obvious Leo wrote:You're missing the point, Hobbes. The neural network extends into every single cell of the human body, of which there are trillions. What the f*** is it that you propose to upload?

I propose you read what I wrote.

last time I looked you can slice of arms and legs, without changing the informational content of the brain. You can even destroy the ears and the eyes with no effect on memory.
Think it over!
Then read what I wrote.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: last time I looked you can slice of arms and legs, without changing the informational content of the brain.

I suggest you submit a paper for peer review to this effect because this is breaking new ground in neuroscience. There might be a Nobel in it for you. Dualism is a belief system, not science.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: last time I looked you can slice of arms and legs, without changing the informational content of the brain.

I suggest you submit a paper for peer review to this effect because this is breaking new ground in neuroscience. There might be a Nobel in it for you. Dualism is a belief system, not science.

I'm not a dualist. And had you read what I said in the first place you would know this you p****.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:I'm not a dualist.

In that case we're in agreement. The mind and the body are one and the notion of uploading a mind onto a computer is a nonsensical idea which any serious biologist would ridicule out of hand. If such a thing were even remotely possible don't you think some left-field scientist would be attempting to do it with a simpler organism than a human being? There is currently a project under way to duplicate, NOT upload, the cognitive mechanisms of a very simple nematode worm onto a computer. This worm has about 100 neurons connected by perhaps a thousand synapses and the project is using one of the most powerful mainframe computers in the world. They are still some years away from success. The human mind has at least 100 billion neurons connected by up to 100 trillion synapses, each of which can fire through a range of up to ten different action potentials. One clever geek managed to work out that this means the human mind contains more logic gates than there are ATOMS in the universe!! Chew on that and then tell me how such a thing can be copied.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:I'm not a dualist.

In that case we're in agreement. The mind and the body are one and the notion of uploading a mind onto a computer is a nonsensical idea which any serious biologist would ridicule out of hand. .

That's because AS I SAID above the idea of the mind as in incorporeal entity is nonsensical.
As a materialist I am still capable of using the word mind ( in the sense of software of the brain), and so as the content of the brain is material- it can be replicated.
AS I SAID above it is unlikely to ever be 100% accurate, but something of the kind is a physical possibility.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: something of the kind is a physical possibility.

Not in the opinion of any of the scientists in this field is the point I'm making and I have more than a passing familiarity with the subject. However you are naturally free to believe as you choose.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: something of the kind is a physical possibility.

Not in the opinion of any of the scientists in this field is the point I'm making and I have more than a passing familiarity with the subject. However you are naturally free to believe as you choose.

It has nothing to do with belief, and pretending you know the minds of scientists does not give you any Brownie points or credibility.
Memory, experience, and personality are PHYSICAL. We are essentially are the structure of our brain. Physical structures are theoretically replicable, as I said in the first place. I'm not saying we can do it know. I am saying that the the idea is not stupid.
Your trouble is that you are actually a Dualist, but can't think your way out of it. You try to talk the talk of a materialist, but you can't walk the walk.
As for familiarity with the subject it is obvious you don't know shit.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:We are essentially are the structure of our brain.

According to whom? I've worked in the biological sciences for over forty years and have never seen a single biologist express this opinion. Perhaps you could offer a link to a reputable source who shares it with you.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:We are essentially are the structure of our brain.

According to whom? I've worked in the biological sciences for over forty years and have never seen a single biologist express this opinion. Perhaps you could offer a link to a reputable source who shares it with you.

According to everyone who rejects the idea of a soul.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:We are essentially are the structure of our brain.

According to whom? I've worked in the biological sciences for over forty years and have never seen a single biologist express this opinion. Perhaps you could offer a link to a reputable source who shares it with you.

According to everyone who rejects the idea of a soul.

Let's not forget that you're the one who's claiming that the mind is separable from the body and I'm the one who claims that this idea is bullshit. However, although you offer no possible method by which this might be done, let's assume for the sake of argument that it can be. In what way would this disembodied mind be distinguishable from the traditional notion of the soul as elaborated by Aquinas?

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote: According to whom? I've worked in the biological sciences for over forty years and have never seen a single biologist express this opinion. Perhaps you could offer a link to a reputable source who shares it with you.

According to everyone who rejects the idea of a soul.

Let's not forget that you're the one who's claiming that the mind is separable from the body?

Let's not forget that you are the too stupid to have read what I wrote if you had then you could not be saying that.

I suggested that the mind could be 'copied' because it is physical and not incorporeal.