Quote:
Originally posted by brenda+9 August 2004 - 21:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (brenda @ 9 August 2004 - 21:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@9 August 2004 - 19:20
How would you consider the hypothetical situation of having had the hard-drive in your head before you became self aware?
Would you consider the information in there as much "you", as that in your brain?
I think that to a degree we do have a kind of hard-drive that is active before we are self aware. For instance no-one can remember being born and yet will all existed in the womb. Psycholanyalisis favours the idea that we only become self away when we recognise that we are a seperate entity from our mothers, perhaps rather than recongising this as a state of independance it could be regonised that we are always connected to others though shared experience. Therefore our 'hard-drive's' may all contain silmilar information. This then raises question of the possiblity of a universal mind to which we all contribute and utilise.
[/b][/quote]
I have had thoughts in the same direction myself. I tend to think of humanity as pool of water, the more influence we have, the more rings we make, and the longer it takes our external selves to die.
This is perhaps the only way to become truly immortal, to have such a lasting effect that our influence never dies.
But then again, everything we do affects the lives of others.
But I tend to think of immortality as the survival of my mind, or at least my thoughts, my conscious influence on others at the very least.
Quote:
The second question is a bit more difficult for me to get my head round, because the seriousness of all this is frying my brain :lol: However I'll try.......
I think that if there was a hard-drive in my head instead of a brain, and that hard-drive had existed prior to me becoming self aware, then yes, I would consider the information in there as much "me" as that in my brain. I'm thinking about the kid in A.I. and robot in Millenium Man...... I know that there are cultural references rather than actual examples but I feel that they are representative of our relationship with technology.
I think I feel sort of the same with regards to having always had it there. But I can't be sure until I've tried it.
And I find the examples you brought up interesting as well.
They are unique, yet simulations of human minds, if we can accept the thought of them as individuals then we also have to accept the thought of a copy of ourselves as a continuation of ourselves, or at least an offspring of sorts.
Quote:
I also tihnk that science-fiction has a much shorter life than it did saw a century ago. Victorian predictions of the future such as the submarine were eventually realised, but in todays fast paced world no sooner is a fictional idea written about than it becomes reality. Science fiction has become the fast-food of the world of literature.
"I'll have 1 cyborg and a side order of micro-bugs please"
"your order will be ready to collect at window 2 please have the correct change ready, have a nice day"
There are subcathegories to sci-fi I think. There will always be the commercialised variety with a brief half-life as well as the timeless classics.
It's just hard to tell which is which with regards to the most immediate ones.
EDit: form.
