AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → What a Twist!

33 9335
Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

There's a pretty old thought experiment that goes a little like this:

Suppose there's a transporter that can get you anywhere in the solar system within a matter of seconds. It does this by scanning every atom in your body, its wave signature, spin, and so on. It can also scan your brain to gather all your memories, thoughts, fears, experiences, etc.
Once the scan is complete, your body on Earth is destroyed and an exact copy is made at your desired destination. The question about whether or not you would undergo such a process often has to do with whether you believe in a soul - something that simply can't be 'captured' by the transporter.
For the longest time, I had no problem using such a device. (Of course, we're supposing here that the transporter works perfectly and there's no risk of anything going wrong).
The reason I wasn't opposed to the transporter is because it is also able to scan your thoughts. So, for example, if you were going to Mars and, as you stepped into the transporter you were thinking that you'd like some ice cream, your thought would not be interrupted when you arrive. It's phenomenologically seamless.

But here's a twist:

Suppose the transporter does everything it's supposed to do. It scans you, stores the information, etc. But instead of destroying your body, you just step out and go on about your day. Meanwhile this 'snapshot' of you is being stored. Years go by, you grow old and die - at which point the transporter exports the copy of you.
Clearly, then, this copy wouldn't be 'you' - which is at odds with how I've thought about this question. It seems like we're nothing but chemicals and organic substances in a particular arrangement. But if that's the case, then you would awaken after you die as this snapshot of yourself. This doesn't seem right at all.
To make it even weirder, suppose the transporter makes the copy of you right then and there without destroying the original body. Clearly here there wouldn't be 'two' of you!

So the question seems to come down to consciousness. Now, presumably your copy would have consciousness, but it wouldn't have *your* consciousness, would it? Other people wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but it seems like there's something different going on inside the mind. So, what's going on?

  • 33 Replies
aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

reminds me of the movie "the sixth day".

I think of this like Portal.


It reminds me of "The Prestige", probably because it is the exact same plot. Anyway...

I don't this is an argument for a soul. In fact, if it works, it could be an argument against a soul. You think things like "there can not be two of me, since there can only be one of me".

But what does "me" even mean? Doesn't this machine operate on the assumption that you are not really one thing, but a multitude of things caught in a certain state? As you said, the machine doesn't copy "you", it copies all of your components. These components are so numerous, and their states so variable, it is very unlikely that they would ever or could ever be reproduced randomly. This is where our notion of uniqueness comes from.

We think that our personal combination of components and states is just that- personal. We are the only thing in the universe that exists exactly as we do. But if this machine exists, this is not the case. Its existence places the information that defines us in the same realm as the information that defines a digital image. It doesn't matter which computer an image was originally saved on-it is the same picture.

Think about it this way: suppose you were copied while unconscious. Then, either "you" or your "copy" was randomly destroyed. You were told this would happen before you woke up. Either way, you would be placed in a different room before you woke up as well. I think, no matter the outcome, the most likely first thought would be:
"Oh, I guess they destroyed the clone, not me."

If you cannot experience or think of yourself as a copy, isn't this proof of having your "own" consciousnesses, despite your origins?
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

"Oh, I guess they destroyed the clone, not me."


That is so true. Your thought before hand is that you will wake up with and a clone will have been made and destroyed. (because otherwise you would be dead.) But, your clone should have the exact same thoughts. So if you were killed, your clone would live your life. Of course, by being unconscience, (as long as you don't have any dreams), your clone should live the exact replica of your life, and be the same person entirly.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

I think I know what you're asking, but I'm not sure.

We live our life through a single perspective. What makes up our perspective is our brain. Our senses, our thoughts, everything we experience is basically coded into our brain and that code is what makes up the ever constantly changing perspective we live through.

If we could each mind and decode each mind so that it was nothing more than a series of numbers, then it would constantly be changing because our minds are constantly creating new information as well as changing in one way or another.

Let's assume we could freeze time, therefore stabilizing everyone's perspective so that we can observe the "code" that makes up every single thing that their brain has stored, or their perspective. For sake of simplicity, I will only be using 6 digits.

Person A's thought code is 123456, Person B's thought code is 121212. Their codes constantly change as time passes and at no point in time will the two codes ever be the same. If person A's code ever has been, or ever will be, 555566, Person B will never be 555566 because that would mean that he would have, at one point in time, had the same exact perspective as person A.

I hope that makes sense, anyway...

Suppose we stopped time, Person A's code is now 333444. At this moment, a computer has copied this code and created a separate entity that is identical in every way down to the molecule. Their thought code will be 333444. For a split moment, both of these people will have the same code. However, if there are two people, then who's perspective are you perceiving life from?

If Person A was, as in the OP, destroyed, while a copy was made, then would Person A suddenly be in that new location, or would person A cease to exist, as if dead, whereas another perspective walks away thinking it was a success?

****

I guess another way to look at it is what if you could copy your thoughts and store them on a computer? Would you snap back into perspective after someone accessed your thoughts after your death, or would you remain dead, thoughts nonexistent, while a new, identical, perspective took over?

That's how I'm looking into this thought experiment. Am I missing the point entirely?

42maelstrom
offline
42maelstrom
123 posts
Nomad

ahhh, very interesting question! I kinda agree with dair5 however he did not address the problem of how when you copy yourself without destroying your original body, which body does your consciousness claim as its own? To sum up my answer I believe that your old consciousness is granted in each body and both recall that they are the genuine you.

So the question seems to come down to consciousness. Now, presumably your copy would have consciousness, but it wouldn't have *your* consciousness, would it? Other people wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but it seems like there's something different going on inside the mind. So, what's going on?


Define consciousness. What is consciousness?

consciousness |Ëkän ch ÉsnÉs|
noun
the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings
⢠the awareness or perception of something by a person
⢠the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world

I think that if you made a copy of yourself and kept it without destroying yourself, the copy would start to function by itself with its own consciousness:

It does this by scanning every atom in your body, its wave signature, spin, and so on. It can also scan your brain to gather all your memories, thoughts, fears, experiences, etc.
Once the scan is complete, your body on Earth is destroyed and an exact copy is made at your desired destination.


Based off of this explanation of the scanner, I understand it in which way that what it does is send a copy of your body to the intended destination, destroys the "old" copy, and then "creates" the new copy come to life at the new destination where you continue to live on after being teleported.

And now based off this, I come to the conclusion that if the teleport device is able to recreate you at the new location, with a conscious, then it is perfectly able to do the same thing by making a copy of yourself and creating it next to yourself. It is physically possible.

Now, the question is, what happens next? I believe that there would then be is the consciousness of your new body and the consciousness of your old (yet new...) body. The new-old body would believe that nothing had happened and now an alien consciousness is functioning with the copy of its body. This new-old body would have no metacognition (for lack of a better term) of what the other body/consciousness is doing/thinking. Now, I also believe that the new body would believe that it's consciousness had come from the pre-transformation body and that somehow the new-old body has a consciousness too. So this new body would be thoroughly vexed by this too. It (rather instinctively) feels like, remembers, just knows that it is the same consciousness from the old body. This thought can be compared to how in the case in which you teleport yourself, you are still thoroughly convinced that you are the same you.

So what is up here? Which body is "right"? I think they're both right. I see nothing contradictory with this outcome.

I believe that consciousness is nothing that comes from a non-physical source. It is the result of the physical phenomenon of the brain. This is something that I once had a hard time grasping. And that is what makes my answer to this question possible, without that supposition my explanation is worthless.

Please dont turn this into another religious thread.


Agreed. When uneasily answered questions start being asked, religion always pops up in an explanation eventually.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Clearly, then, this copy wouldn't be 'you' - which is at odds with how I've thought about this question. It seems like we're nothing but chemicals and organic substances in a particular arrangement. But if that's the case, then you would awaken after you die as this snapshot of yourself. This doesn't seem right at all.


I would be gone at that point so it wouldn't much matter to me. I suppose I would consider this copy as sort of a son.
I could keep records and other sorts of messages to pas on the knowledge I had gained since that point.

To make it even weirder, suppose the transporter makes the copy of you right then and there without destroying the original body. Clearly here there wouldn't be 'two' of you!

So the question seems to come down to consciousness. Now, presumably your copy would have consciousness, but it wouldn't have *your* consciousness, would it? Other people wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but it seems like there's something different going on inside the mind. So, what's going on?


The copy would be me up to the moment it began having different experiences then me. This would almost be like having a twin but closer.

I think a more interesting question would be who would be considered the original? Which one would get to go one being me? If this machine worked by making the copy right away then from both of our experiences stepping out of the machine both would think they are the original.
getanewhouse
offline
getanewhouse
44 posts
Nomad

They could also destroy the old copy and then just take 100 years to transmit your new copy to its destination, that would be a twist too. I wouldn't use it. I would go to Mars on the slow boat.

Deth666
offline
Deth666
653 posts
Nomad

I have a some questions/thoughts. Supposing your religious and the machine can somehow copy your soul wouldn't old you go to heaven and then when you died there would be two of you in heaven... or hell. Another thought, twins have some sort of deep connection where they can tell if the other dies or is in pain. Would you have that deep connection to the other you would you feel sorrow or emptiness for the other's death like a twin would? Also, the way a transporter works, in theory, is it rebuilds you from different matter. Which makes you not you but someone else that has the same memories, right?

42maelstrom
offline
42maelstrom
123 posts
Nomad

Another thought, twins have some sort of deep connection where they can tell if the other dies or is in pain.


I, being a twin, disagree with this. Even if it's just how neither I nor my twin have ever died or been in "great pain", I still don't believe it.

Also, the way a transporter works, in theory, is it rebuilds you from different matter. Which makes you not you but someone else that has the same memories, right?


Well, since it doesn't use the same matter that makes you, I suppose it's not a perfect copy, but it recreates you atom by atom so what would be "rebuilt" would be an exact copy, like, there's no way to make it more exact. Which even with that you could indeed argue that it is someone else with the same memories, albeit "someone else" who has the exact physical and mental characteristics and habits as you. *shivers* Personally that would freak me out...

I think if a teleport-machine like the one pondered was ever possible, it would instead take your own body and somehow move it to the location, and then recreate it, so that none of this cloning business would be possible.

See, this can also be compared to cloning. When scientists made a clone of the sheep (I forget her name! Dolly?) did the clone have the same consciousness? The difference here is that all of the memories and experiences of Dolly or whatever her name was were not recreated in the "copy".
Deth666
offline
Deth666
653 posts
Nomad

I, being a twin, disagree with this. Even if it's just how neither I nor my twin have ever died or been in "great pain", I still don't believe it.


My uncles are twins and they have been able to sense those sort of things in each other. Maybe not all twins can, I don't know.
42maelstrom
offline
42maelstrom
123 posts
Nomad

My uncles are twins and they have been able to sense those sort of things in each other. Maybe not all twins can, I don't know.


Hehe, I guess the two of us are an inferior set of twins
gaboloth
offline
gaboloth
1,612 posts
Peasant

Let's imagine another situation... a person goes into the transporter and his copy is transported to mars. The original person is not destroyed, and, convinced that the funny machine he entered was just a robotic hairdresser, continues his old life with a new haircut. The copy, on mars, thinks his old copy is destroyed as usually, so they never meet and the don't know anything about each other.
At this point they are equally the same person. They are both convinced to be the original person and they are both right. They have the same thoughts, memories and consciousness of the original person. It doesn't matter if the copy's memories are not strictly true regarding its body, because the only way we can be sure of our memories is memory itself.
Only if they meet each other they will start questioning their identity and, maybe, they will start to think they are not as "true" as they used to be.

Of course this is a too objective perspective that doesn't count the subjectivity of the original person before entering the machine. We all feel that our thoughts and conscience are locked inside our body, but what makes us think so? Only the memory to have always lived inside this body. Rationally I would think that a consciousness living in an equal body with the same memories would be the same as the original person, but if I were about to enter the machine, I doubt I would be able to convince myself that a new built copy of myself would keep my conscience from dying together with my old body.

Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

We all feel that our thoughts and conscience are locked inside our body, but what makes us think so? Only the memory to have always lived inside this body.


This is precisely the point I was trying to articulate, and you've done so beautifully. So, cheers!
But here's the thing: if a contiguous memory is all there is to consciousness, then why isn't an individual's consciousness duplicated in the twin? In other words, why would I be unable to feel what my twin is feeling and share his experiences? Of course, such an idea seems preposterous. But the silliness is difficult to explain away with mere physicalism.
aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

then why isn't an individual's consciousness duplicated in the twin? In other words, why would I be unable to feel what my twin is feeling and share his experiences? Of course, such an idea seems preposterous. But the silliness is difficult to explain away with mere physicalism.


Hmmm? Not really. I mean, your second question is answered by the obvious fact that twins don't share the same nerves/nervous system. I mean, their nerves may have been laid down using the same DNA coding patterns, but they aren't the same actual nerves. That's like buying two identical computers, and wondering why the cursor doesn't move on both monitors when you move just one mouse.

The First question is a little more complicated, but same basic premise. People are more than just the sum of their genes, from the very beginning. Both embryos cannot be in the exact same position in the womb. So, they will get slightly different nutrients.

I haven't taken a human biology class in a few years, but I remember enough to know that personality can be influenced by the various chemicals you pick up in the womb.

And then, after birth, things diverge even more. Both twins won't have the same experiences, won't lay down the same memories.

So, if you consider "consciousnesses" to be a kind of personalized way to be aware of the universe, it makes sense that twins don't share consciousnesses. This awareness builds and changes over time, it isn't fixed at conception.

Such it would be with your clone- as soon as it splits off, it would be a new person.
42maelstrom
offline
42maelstrom
123 posts
Nomad

But here's the thing: if a contiguous memory is all there is to consciousness, then why isn't an individual's consciousness duplicated in the twin? In other words, why would I be unable to feel what my twin is feeling and share his experiences


The way I see it, just because you and your twin have the exact same memory/consciousness, that doesn't mean your minds are conjoined somehow.

Here's another question: let's just say you are indeed able to feel what your twin is feeling and share his experiences, what amount of presence in your twin would be given? Would you only be able to share his experiences? Would you automatically think the exact same way he does and therefore share his thoughts too? Would he share your thoughts and experiences too?
Would you be able to control his body movements? Or would that even be unnecessary, as any movement you think of making would be paralleled by your twin's thought; since you think that, your twin must think the exact same thing and therefore move the exact way?

This sort of double-consciousness is what makes it hard to believe that such a thing would happen. The result where a new person/consciousness is formed is a lot more agreeable.
Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

I mean, your second question is answered by the obvious fact that twins don't share the same nerves/nervous system. I mean, their nerves may have been laid down using the same DNA coding patterns, but they aren't the same actual nerves.


I guess my initial surprise when I first posted this was regarding the original teleportation premise - your atoms are copied, destroyed, and replicated in a different location. I used to have the idea that I would still be alive and be myself without interruption. But now I just don't think that's possible. I was having trouble explaining where the breakdown was happening between (1) and then (2) and (3).
I'm just wondering - does/did anyone share my intuition about (1)?

This sort of double-consciousness is what makes it hard to believe that such a thing would happen. The result where a new person/consciousness is formed is a lot more agreeable.


Yeah, for sure. I can't even get my head around what it would be like to share a consciousness - especially if those two consciousnesses were happening simultaneously. Talk about sensory overload!
Showing 16-30 of 33