[yotamarker]

as we see in the invincible series, another take on non-homologous imprinting

a brain data is transferred into another body leaving 2 copies as such :

1 has regular continuity memory
2 has the same memory as the original except waking up in a different bed and body

the sense of continuity comes from the memory.
if subject 2 had gotten false memories of being son-goku he would have had a sense of self of goku
and even expect to have his super powers.

due to a lack of such tech ATM we need to discuss is there such a thing as a soul ? if so what does it do ?
can it explain why ppl do not have memories from before age about 3yo ?

or are we simply copies made by time, completely separate from our past self ?

[MikeB]

It's more than memories, we naturally use different parts of the brain and store different things in them.

The real theory behind astrology is that you're born using particular parts of the brain for particular things (one area for home-based things, another for sport, another for work production, success, relaxing.. etc). Memories go into those areas, and so during the year as planets move, areas of the mind are highlighted, you become better/worse at different things (different to other people).

In that theory.. if you transplanted memory from one brain into another (same location). Eg. A list of tools. The receiving person may already be using that part of the brain for homely things, and would therefore associate tools with homeliness, and sleep in the shed. If they can't then they may have a nervous breakdown...

Someone who has lost their memories due to electro shock treatment/ECT would still have their personality underneath if there are enough links. IMO.

[MagnusWootton]

I think even if you did make it conscious -  that would mean god is in the robot as well.  and it doesnt make sense.
It means the robot can actually be possessed by daemons,  like we can.

[infurl]

It can only be a matter of time before flat-earthers start posting on this forum.

[yotamarker]

on theory says
we are uploaded into a body inside the matrix at the age we "start to form memories"
but even within this theory one has to take under account the influence of the time dimension
unless time works different there. but really, how different could it be ?!

[WriterOfMinds]

Possible reasons why we don't remember our early lives include 1) the brain structures that store memories are not yet fully developed and 2) at a young age we learn rapidly and therefore the forgetting process also operates more aggressively. This does NOT mean that fetuses/neonates/infants/toddlers aren't conscious. You can have conscious experience of an event without remembering it.

Theories that designate any human being as non-conscious without solid grounds for doing so are very dangerous -- because, if they are in fact conscious, it can lead to inhumane treatment. For example, some doctors used to do surgery on infants without analgesics because it was assumed that they couldn't feel pain. And nobody ever reported on the horror of this experience because they couldn't remember it. But in light of later scientific evidence (https://time.com/3827167/this-is-a-babys-brain-on-pain/), it seems likely that infants DO register pain and these surgeries were probably terrible for them in the moment.

As for the time thing ... a human being is a system. A system retains its systemic identity even if parts change or are lost and replaced over time. This thinking can be applied to everything from cars to corporations, so why not humans as well? (Of course you can argue about this, you can claim that any change means it's no longer the same system, but that is not my opinion.) If you are thinking of all parts of the time dimension as existing at once, then one could imagine a human organism as a single object that extends through the time dimension from t0 to t1, rather than a series of discrete copies. Because why should there be breaks in time that would separate one copy from another?

[frankinstien]

You can have conscious experience of an event without remembering it.

I can't see consciousness without, at least short-term memory. A part of consciousness is self-reflection, as to, what I am I doing, and what will I do next, so some kind of memory is required. Now, that doesn't mean one can't forget the episodic events which is a completely different process of developing longer-term memories. But in the process of being conscious short-term memory is essential.

[yotamarker]

if I could somehow see hear smell taste touch via other ppls senses,
do we share the same consciousness ?

[yotamarker]

if I could somehow see hear smell taste touch via other ppls senses, AND control their bodies
do we share the same consciousness ?

[WriterOfMinds]

I can't see consciousness without, at least short-term memory. A part of consciousness is self-reflection, as to, what I am I doing, and what will I do next, so some kind of memory is required. Now, that doesn't mean one can't forget the episodic events which is a completely different process of developing longer-term memories. But in the process of being conscious short-term memory is essential.

This might be term confusion again. I'm talking about phenomenal consciousness, which is what I assumed yotamarker was talking about. Phenomenal consciousness is subjective experience consisting of qualia. I believe it would be possible to have this without having any distinct thoughts at all -- just a pure internal sensation of something. Self-reflection is part of what I call "self-awareness," which is a different function that is not at all synonymous with subjective experience, though they might be related in some way.

if I could somehow see hear smell taste touch via other ppls senses, AND control their bodies
do we share the same consciousness ?

I wouldn't say so; that's just hooking up someone else's IO to your brain. If you could do something like the Vulcan mind-meld then that would probably qualify as a shared consciousness.

[frankinstien]

This might be term confusion again. I'm talking about phenomenal consciousness, which is what I assumed yotamarker was talking about. Phenomenal consciousness is subjective experience consisting of qualia. I believe it would be possible to have this without having any distinct thoughts at all -- just a pure internal sensation of something. Self-reflection is part of what I call "self-awareness," which is a different function that is not at all synonymous with subjective experience, though they might be related in some way.

The experience of qualia could not be fully explained without the property or component of time. We experience our feelings with respect to time. Time gives the qualia a depth of persistence and therefore a component of its degree or revalence. If pain lasts a long time it's worse than a fast pinprick or the experience of delicious food is not so interesting when it's very short-lived. So time is a critical component for qualia. So I disagree with the assertions of Phenomenal Consciousness of qualia without a component of time.

[WriterOfMinds]

I'm sure the perception of time does color the experience, but I don't see why that would make the experience impossible without it.
In any case, what I was getting at is that I believe you can feel (for example) pain without thinking self-reflectively about it and being able to say "I am feeling pain" to yourself.

[MagnusWootton]

A computer with a memory is not conscious by itself.

consciousness has an extra property attached that even a perfect machine copy of a person wont have in my mind,   to make something conscious opens up the gates of hell, I don't know why you are so attracted to it.

[infurl]

You know I seriously thought about renaming this forum to AiFringe but decided against it because it isn't weird enough yet.

[yotamarker]

You know I seriously thought about renaming this forum to AiFringe but decided against it because it isn't weird enough yet.

well I would argue you should add a whole forum for the living grimoire AGI software design pattern but there is this site :
https://jizz.is/