Atheists, do you deny the existence of your own sentience?

Question

Isn't there a thought experiment where a man's brain is slowly replaced by electronic parts? And the question is, in the end, "is the collection of electronic parts really still the man?" Doesn't that demonstrate the difficulty of claiming the identity of a person is physically contained in his or her brain? And what does this theory do for the problem of qualia?

Another way of asking this is, don't you think a human built from scratch cell-by-cell in a laboratory wouldn't truly experience events, but would merely mimic human behavior like an android? Doesn't that mean there is a missing nonphysical ingredient, the sentience?

Let's assume a person's identity lies within his or her mind, for this argument.

Mustn't one of the following be true?

1. "Strong AI" is true.
2. People who truly experience have nonphysical sentiences.

Lókasenna, very thoughtful response. I think the best response in defense of dualism would be:

The sentience might experience the information the brain "sends" to it. The fact that people stop experiencing emotions etc. when part of their brain is damaged could also be interpreted as evidence that this "flow" of qualia information has been damaged along with the brain. Therefore, perhaps personality and emotions really AREN'T a part of who we are, but additional attributes of our physical bodies.

Answer 1

Your gedankenexperiment is seriously flawed - at present we just don't know what a 'brain replaced by electronic parts' even IS. We still haven't determined how memory is stored, and that's all-important.

Try a similar experiment: instead of *replacing* the brain, duplicate it. And don't use electronic parts, but biological tissue grown to be an atom-perfect replica of the original. Let's say that at the end of the process you have two brains that are utterly identical at an instant, after which they may go on to think their own independent thoughts.

What is the difference between them? How is the copy not identical to the first? If there is any difference, is that not a product of flaws in the duplication process?

On a related subject: How do you know that the 'you' that woke up this morning is the same 'you' that went to sleep the previous night?

You believe you are the same person, but so would the duplicate in the clone experiment. You have all your previous memories, but again so does the clone.

In the clone experiment, both the original and the clone would BELIEVE that they are the original. They would have nothing in their minds to suggest otherwise. If the memories had been copied perfectly the clone would remember being prepared for the cloning process, and would simply experience waking up on the other operating table. The clone would have no sensation of being a duplicate.

Outside observers would know that one was a clone, but there would be no observable flaws in the clone to give away the fact that it's an artefact. To the outside world there would simply be two identical people.

You can posit a 'soul' to maintain the separation, but this really is a deus ex machina. If the 'soul' does not reside in the (physical, electrical, electrochemical) substance of the brain - as the mind does - then it effectively isn't there.

CD

Answer 2

If the soul experiences some of the same things that our brain experiences, then, souls must have ways of 'measuring' what neurones are firing in our brains. If we can stimulate neurones with electrodes, which causes us to experience certain memories or feelings, then, if the soul has a "use" then it too must experience some of these things too. If our soul "sees" things, then, it must have eyes. No-one says that the soul sees over 360 degrees; so it must have forward-facing eyes like ours. How can a soul have all these observational tools? Why would the soul be restricted to feeling exactly the same as what we feel as a result of biochemistry? If our medulla is damaged, or our brainstem, why can't the soul control our body? If we have a serotonin imbalance as the result of disease, why does our soul suffer depression and mood disorders? It seems that the soul is highly physical.

A small amount of damage might even cause rather dramatic changes in your personality. Why? Because your brain is the seat of your self-awareness, the locus of your intelligence, your compassion, and your creativity. All of your mental activities - your thoughts, emotions and feelings - and all your bodily processes are affected by the functioning of your brain.

If you take a couple of drinks, or smoke some pot, YOU become intoxicated. It is easy to understand how the chemicals in alcohol and cannabis can affect the ticking of your nerve cells. But how can physical reactions in your brain cause the spiritual YOU to get high? If your "soul" controls your body how does it do so? When you drive a car, you sit in the driver's seat, you push on the pedals with your feet, and you turn the wheel with your hands. If you consider your body to be a biological machine "driven" by your "soul", where does the driver "sit"? And how does your purely spiritual "soul" pull the biological strings that make your neurones fire and your muscles move?

Answer 3

So far nobody has been able to create an artificial intelligence. The problem is that Machines only do what they are told to.
Thought experiments are all very nice and good but they are only conjecture until they can be tested.
Your thought experiment is actually very old. It is the same as the question of how many wiskers make a beard and the problem of when a ship became a new ship. Both of those are older than the Greek philosophers that recorded them.

Try this
http://www.geocities.com/gayle5555/Theseus.html

Answer 4

You are talking about identity theory - or is the whole more than the sum of the parts. and no it does not mean there is a spirit or sole - computers are the same - just put all the components on a bench - nothing - put them together and plug into eclectics - wow.

We do not need any non physical component other than life itself

As guy from a primitive tribe came to learn car mechanics. He listened and learn intensely. However at the end of the listen he went to the teacher and said. "I am sorry, I do not mean to be disrespectful but you did not tell us how to look after the hundreds of horses in the engine."

Answer 5

There is no such thing as an immortal, immaterial soul that inhabits our bodies to give us consciousness.

Consciousness is the result of chemical reactions in the brain. Replacing the brain with a computer designed to simulate it will also result in consciousness.

Artificial intelligence programs can already simulate the intelligence of insects. At the rate they are advancing, they will be able to simulate humans within our lifetime and they will achieve sentience long before that.

Answer 6

the whole is more than the sum of its parts, this does not however prove the existence of a soul.

AI is not possible to program as it would require something that computers will never be able to. that is to learn.

as for a human constructed cell by cell in a labratory, he would be exactly the same as any other human, feel the same way we do, just because he was created in a different way does not make him less human.

Answer 7

erm. yeah, that pretty much sums it up, LOL! everything i think and say are just results of the various chemicals and hormones in my brain. i think a human built from scratch cell-by-cell would experience events, though, just like we would...just because they were created in a different way doesn't mean they are not human, if all the genes and everything are the same. although i don't think building a human cell-by-cell is possible...?

Answer 8

If you're asking if that sentience is God (or a soul), then it wouldn't matter if a human was assembled in a lab or downloaded to a computer because God underlies in all things, no matter how they are created.

Answer 9

"Doesn't that demonstrate the difficulty of claiming the identity of a person is physically contained in his or her brain"

that demonstrates no such thing. and last thing I checked, qualia itself was not a generally accepted fact as you would present it.

Answer 10

Your question "is the collection of electronic parts really still the man?"

Yes it is. Still have the physical body.

Experiment , which you mentioned, was mean for MIND's existence, not the MAN existence.