posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Bleeeeep
If they learn to transfer memory from the brain on to a synthetic brain/body would you do it or would you feel like it is morally wrong because it
would destroy the very essence of what it is to be human?
Would it though? I really don't associate my physical body with my essential nature, and I don't think that the important part of "what it is to
be human" is in the biological details.
I know that ultimately the mind is completely reducible to the biology of the brain, but I think people are far more concerned with the mental aspects
of that system than with biological aspects (despite those two things actually being the same thing). Certainly your human nature isn't strictly
bound to your human body. Our bodies change all the time and in very dramatic ways over the course of our lives, but we're not all faced with
constant identity crises because of this. We don't lose a part of our selves when we cut our hair; amputees aren't less human because they have
less of a human body; 98% of the atoms in our bodies are replaced yearly
we're not only still the same human person in the important ways, we're not even aware of this process is taking place. I would say that means that
the extent to which human nature or identity are determined in an important way by the individual physical pieces that make up our bodies is so
minimal that any moral argument in that regard has no basis.
The technology will allow us to transplant human brains in - I would guess - 30 years or so. The person, their sense of self, their memories, their
personality, and their intelligence are all in the brain. Moving it to another body isn't that much different than changing the original body -
neither case presents a particularly compelling challenge philosophically or morally. You would be you, just in a different body. You are your
brain, your body is your vehicle. Your brain is the driver. I don't think there are moral or philosophical issues surrounding drivers changing
If a synthetic body was available, I would take it if something went wrong with my body. Likewise, if a superior synthetic brain could be developed
using a map of my brain's connections so as to preserve all cognitive features, I would make the switch. Living as a person in a non-human body with
a non-human brain wouldn't threaten my essential nature or self. I may not be a human under these circumstances, but I would still be a person. At
that point though, I don't think we would have a moral obligation to humanness. We're people, and if we can be better people if we live in
non-human bodies, we should do it.