Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!nanotech
From: alan@oz.nm.paradyne.com (Alan Lovejoy)
Newsgroups: sci.nanotech
Subject: Re: Consiousness, the body, and the soul (long and mystical)
Message-ID: <Jul.6.19.46.18.1989.11537@athos.rutgers.edu>
Date: 6 Jul 89 23:46:19 GMT
Sender: nanotech@athos.rutgers.edu
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Lines: 167
Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu


In article <Jul.3.20.34.50.1989.4694@athos.rutgers.edu< macleod@drivax.UUCP (MacLeod) writes:
<Alan Lovejoy writes:
<:The empirical evidence is OVERWHELMING that consciousness is a function of
<:the brain.  Blows to the head may knock you out.  Drugs alter your state
<:of consciousness.  Surgery on the brain can change you.  Occams razor 
<:suggests that the brain is the seat of consciousness.  

<If your telephone is damaged and nonfunctional, do you conclude that the
<entire telephone network has gone down?  As I read the evidence, the brain
<and consiousness are intimately related, but I'm not going to posit a cause
<and effect relationship.

How is the brain like a telephone?  Who or what is calling whom or what?
What information is being exchanged, over what medium (no pun intended!)?
Do you use your brain as a "phone" to call "yourself?"  Or is the "material
world" on one end of the line, and the "spiritual world" on the other?
I can see that damaging the phone might impair my ability to talk to you,
but how would it cause you to forget something you already learned unless
your memories were stored in the phone?  And why would it cause you to 
experience total lack of consciousness?  What scientific facts exist to
corroborate this theory?  Has experiment shown that the "line" can be cut
by "jamming" the communications channel, perhaps with "shielding?"

<:If consciousness
<:were a manifestation of some "spiritual" phenomenon, then how could mundane
<:physical events, such as alcohol, affect it?  If memory were spiritual,
<:how could a blow to the head cause amnesia?
<
<There are large parts of my current life that I don't remember, without
<having been hit on the head.

So?  What does this prove, and why? 

<If memory and mental functioning is
<mechanical, how can disabled patients learn to walk again when the regions
<of the brain associated with motor functions are damaged?  If there was a
<one-to-one mechanistic correspondence, this should be impossible.  

Because neural networks can learn something more than once.  As long as the 
net is not saturated, ANY PART OF IT can be taught--or retaught--new things.

On May 11, 1988, a hearing of the United States Senate Special Committe on
Aging was held. At that hearing, Dr. Carl W. Cotman, Ph. D., Professor of
Psychology and Neurology, UC-Irvine, a leading brain researcher, testified
as follows:

"For years, it was believed that the central nervous system was incapable
of growth or repair processes.  This view was summarized by Cajal and was
dogma for over three decades."

"[Qoute from S. Ramon y Cajal, 1928 deleted]"

"However, in the last several years it has become clear that this is not
true.  With the proper stimulus the brain has the capacity to rewire its
damaged circuitry (e.g., synaptic plasticity).  Even the aged brain has 
this capacity.  The stimulus may be a perturbation such as trauma, or a
metabolic insult, or it may be more subtle, such as a modification in
behavior or learning a new task.  The stimulus may also be a graft  
("transplant") of neural tissue or a chemical (e.g., neurotrophic factor).
Nearly whole neronal networks can be replaced by implanting fetal neurons 
into adult brain.  The brain in its wisdom has a program to repair itself
from its minor injuries.  It is self repairing."

"The observation of neural regeneration will help us to understand and 
develop strategies to treat the changes that occur in the aged human central
nervous system.  Reactive growth can maintain function if a portion of the
circuit remains intact.  As cells are lost, new connections are made by the
remaining healthy cells that assume similar functions of the fibers from 
the same or converging pathways and may amplify weakened signals.  This 
maintains functional stability despite the cell loss.  The remaining cells
assume more of a workload in order to keep the connections at their normal
levels."

"Neuronal regrowth also appears to occur in Alzheimer's Disease (AD), a
disease previously thought to be degenerative with no reserve capacity in
the brain cells.  Generally, disease-induced neuronal loss in the AD
brain acts as a stimulus [for cell regeneration] in a manner similar to that of 
specific lesions in the rat brain."  [Source: Life Extension Report,
July 1989]

<Hypnotists have put subjects into trances and told them that they
<would be given a complex mathematical problem, of the type they normally
<could solve when fully conscious in several hours of work.  They
<were also told that they would have several hours to solve it, beginning
<with a snap of the fingers and ending with another finger snap. 
<When the hypnotists went >snap< >snap<, the subjects gave the
<correct answers.

This proves nothing, since it has not been demonstrated that hypnotism
inhibits neuronal functioning--or enhances the rate at which spirits think.
If you are using "spirit power" to compute when under hypnosis, what
prevents you from using it at other times?  How do you know that it's not
the brain which is the speedier one?  This simply has no bearing whatsoever
on whether or not the self is an epiphenomenon of the brain.

<I know many people who have very detailed memories of past lives.  As I 
<mentioned above, I can't remember much of my own life, so I have no problem
<with the concept of amnesia.  

As JoSH pointed out, memories can be false.  My point is that forgetten 
memories are just as relevant as the "dream dinners" that Bilbo "enjoyed"
in Mirkwood Forest.  They are without meaning, value, purpose or effect.

But since you say you disagree, can we conclude that you are perfectly
willing to serve as the subject in a scientific experiment of complete
induced amnesia?

<:Suppose you use nanotechnology to make a perfect copy of yourself.  Which
<:"copy" gets your "soul"?  This is really very related to the question of
<:what happens to the soul of a reanimated cryonics patient.  The answer
<:is so obvious that most people can't see it:  your "soul" is simply you.
<:If you make a copy of yourself, you make a copy of your soul--by definition.
<:Neither copy has precedence.  Bacteria and other cells do this all the time.
<
<:If there is a spiritual "soul" that has some sort of existence independent
<:of the body, then IT IS INDEPENDENT OF THE BODY.  The "soul" would then be
<:analogous to a recording or copy of one's memories/personality/identity.  
<:There can be multiple instances of the same soul, just as there can be multipl:tapes with the same recording.  The "copy" of you that goes to heaven is not
<:affected by what happens to the copy of you that remains in your brain cells.
<:There is no reason why these copies cannot be played by different instruments
<:at different times at different speeds--in different universes.  But why 
<:would God bother making the last backup when the original copy isn't going
<:to be erased just yet due to cryonic suspension?
<
<Your analysis is, if you'll forgive me, superficial.  

What you really mean is that it does not hypothesize the existence of things
for which there is nethier any evidence nor any need.  Spirits, souls, 
heavens and such are not logically required to exist in order to explain
any known, reproducible, scientifically-verified fact whatsoever.  

<What is all this
<about God and heaven?  

It's my attempt to frame my arguments in the language of those who believe
in spiritual souls, heavens and deities.  It is not intended to indicate
what I personally believe.

Personally, I think that--with the POSSIBLE exception of "Deity"--it's all
rubbish. But I think that if there is a Deity then almost all of our current
ideas about It are probably a joke at best.  I really hope there IS a Deity.
But that's a hope, not a conviction.

<How does the soul's independence from the body imply that it can be recorded
<and taped and stored?  

My assertion is that the soul is nothing more than information.  Put another
away, the "active ingredient" of the self is information.  The term "soul"
refers to one's "true self" which is independent of the body.  Scientifically,
we have found something which satisfies this definition--the information
stored in the brain.  Those who find this unsatisfactory are like the Jews
who still await the Messiah.  They will wait forever.  

<Even if consiousness were an epiphenomena [sic] of the
<body, how does that make any kind of point-to-point mapping possible?  Do
<those who lose a leg lose one leg's worth of consiousness?

Why not ask someone who has lost a leg?  Of course, the scientific community
holds that consciousness is a function of the brain in particular, and only
of the body to the extent that the brain depends on the body for logistic
support.  

Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL.
Disclaimer: I do not speak for AT&T Paradyne.  They do not speak for me. 
______________________________Down with Li Peng!________________________________
Motto: If nanomachines will be able to reconstruct you, YOU AREN'T DEAD YET.