X-Message-Number: 23816 References: <> From: Subject: Re: David Pizer [Unique Awareness Sensor Theory] Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 15:40:22 -0400 David, I like your UAS theory, but I don't think it really works. I like it because it supports all of the intuitions that I have about uploading, teleportation to Mars (ie. duplicates), and the like. Intuitively, I won't be the upload, and neither will I be the duplicate walking around mars who thinks he is me. (for any who are unfamiliar with the mars example, see "the teleportation conundrum" at http://www.betterhumans.com/Resources/Encyclopedia/article.aspx? articleID=2004-01-22-3 for a description). In a strong emotional way, I feel like that (if I were to be vaporized and one of them created), I would not have survived. However, upon further reflection, the UAS theory seems to be just an extension (albeit a very good one) of the somatic theory of personal identity. This theory states that you are (or have survived as) some future being just in case you share some measure of bodily (physical, muscle/bone/protein/neural) continuity with that being. That being said, UAS is subject to similar types of arguments. For example, consider the following thought experiment: Using a fully developed molecular nanotechnology (or something of the sort), we manufacture an atom-for-atom duplicate of one neuron in your UAS. After it is completed, we excise the original UAS neuron and replace it with the duplicate. Did you survive? (A) If the answer is no, then you are a remarkably fragile thing, and probably die (ie. fail to survive) many times in the course of your natural lifetime (my understanding is that it is quite normal for a small number of brain cells to kick the bucket every so often). In this case the terms "die" and "survive", as we are using them, become irrelevant to the question we are actually asking: "Will I survive in the same sense that I currently survive day-to-day?" (B) If the answer is yes, then what happens if we replace one brain cell every day (or hour, or minute) until the whole UAS is replaced. If you survived each individual neuron replacement, then you must have also survived the whole replacement of the UAS. In this case, it is not the the specific chunk of "brain-meat" that matters (since you now have an entirely new chunk, but still survived). If you want to keep going with the UAS theory at this point, you can say that what matters is something about how the brain-meat functioned that was independent of the specific atoms that composed it (as long as they were arranged in the right way). However, this gets us into trouble again with Mars teleportation and duplicates, so it's not a solution as of yet. This question (or personal identity, or criteria for survival) is an extremely difficult one. No one seems to have any good answers. Again, my intuitions take me along lines similar to this UAS theory, but, unfortunately, logic says otherwise. And we must admit that our strong identification of personal survival with some sort of physical survival may just be an evolutionary hold-over. We would be pretty useless at living if we did not normally equate survival with physical survival (ie. "Sure I'll jump off the cliff for $50. After all, only my physical body will be harmed"). Consequently, the "real" answer about survival may be very unintuitive. Sincerely, Eric Morgen Quoting David Pizer <> Message #23811 Subject: Memories are not the most important part of "you" Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:23:50 -0700 A Philosophical Look at Memories and Survial of the Individual From: David Pizer The recent discussions about memories on Cryonet are more evidence for the conclusion I have been arguing (on the philosophical nature of identity survival that is concerned with survival of a person) for the last 20 years. --- that conclusion is: Memories are not the most important thing that makes you you. The most important thing about you is your ability to feel awareness. Each person *is* a unique awareness sensor. This thing (UAS) is a part of your brain and it is made of brain meat. It is the central part of any person and all the rest of the brain and body are accessories of it. It exists over time in specific space, therefore it is a one and only. This leads to an important conclusion -- that the ONLY way for a person to survive is to save his UAS (unique awareness sensor). One cannot survive by creating a so-called duplicate, (in fact it is impossible to really duplicate a specific UAS), nor can one survive by uploading or downloading. Nor can one survive by only saving DNA or only saving memories. The only way to survive is for your brain to survive (the part of your brain that senses awareness). So if you are really serious about survival, at the present time your only option is to have your brain saved, and at present the only way to do that (should you be unfortunate enough to suffer legal death) is through cryonics. If you want eternal life (if that is even possible because physical immortality alone is not enough, we need the universe to also be or become eternal - which I also have an argument below that it is) you are going to need for your UAS to become an un-aging hunk of living tissue. Reversing aging should not be very hard to do in the next couple hundred years. Once that is done, you then need to get this hunk of tissue to the safest place in the universe. After that you merely need to work with other UAS's to keep the universe from winding down. You should have billions of years to work on that problem. So I hope I have laid out an interesting plan for those who want to live forever. If any part of this interests you, then I suggest you check out the Society for Venturism. This is the religion for those who think they want to live forever. David Pizer Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23816