anima ex machina
What are the boundaries of the self? That is, when I talk about 'me', 'myself', or 'I', what do I really mean? Where is the boundary between the Cartesian inner and outer? The body seems the obvious place to make the distinction, but that still presents problems.
Where in the body can one place the boundary? The skin? That can't be; for one thing, the skin is porous, not a solid body. What if Ilost part of my skin, or even a whole limb? 'I' would still be 'me', wouldn't I? And what about the things that are inside of me, that clearly aren't a part of myself, the salad I ate for dinner, or the bacteria living in my intestine that are helping me digest it? They are both within my skin, but clearly aren't 'me' in the strictest sense of the word.
According to Hilary Putnam, perhaps, the focus of our search could be reduced to the brain. After all, I really have no way of knowing if I really do control this body I seem to have, or if the whole of my conscious existence is nothing more than a "brain in a vat", wired up with electrodes stimulating the appropriate neurons at the behest of some computer. But even then, if we restrict our search for the self, the 'thing' of existence, to the brain, we still run into issues. You can't point to the 'consciousness' in a brain; my brain isn't consciousness any more than a live wire 'is' electricity. All you can point to is neurons and electrical signals running between them. But is that consciousness?
Imagine for the moment, that medical science has created a way to replace an individual neuron with an electronic device that functions exactly the same as the neuron, but isn't a living cell. We're a lot closer to that scenario than you might think. So, suppose that you replace a neuron in your brain with a neuro-chip (probably not what the scientists will call them). Intuitively, if the chip functions exactly like the neuron it replaces, then your consciousness should continue unaltered, right? But then you replace another. And another, and another, and another...And finally, your entire brain has been replaced with neuromechanics. What would happen to your consciousness? If you think there would be a perceptible difference, at what point would one notice it? When only 80% of your organic brain is left? 40% ? 10% ? 1% ? Does 'I' really exist at all?
Now let's shift our focus back to the body. I've already got an electronic brain, but what if I could swap out other body parts with better functioning prosthetics? What if we were able to build replacement organs, a liver, say, that functioned better than my natural liver? Or lungs that were more efficient at pulling oxygen from the air, and sending it to a heart that won't tire with age, or require constant maintenance in the form of aerobic activity?
I wouldn't hesitate to replace all of those organs with better-performing alternatives, and one day I may have the chance. But that's not what I'm getting at. As I replace more and more parts of my body with non-natural prosthetics, at some point do I stop being human? Our understanding of what it means to be human implies a lot of things, particularly when it comes to genetics. But if I've replaced my entire body with synthetics, I wouldn't really be human any more. But if not human, what would I be then, when my soul is no longer bound by the limits of biology?
Where in the body can one place the boundary? The skin? That can't be; for one thing, the skin is porous, not a solid body. What if Ilost part of my skin, or even a whole limb? 'I' would still be 'me', wouldn't I? And what about the things that are inside of me, that clearly aren't a part of myself, the salad I ate for dinner, or the bacteria living in my intestine that are helping me digest it? They are both within my skin, but clearly aren't 'me' in the strictest sense of the word.
According to Hilary Putnam, perhaps, the focus of our search could be reduced to the brain. After all, I really have no way of knowing if I really do control this body I seem to have, or if the whole of my conscious existence is nothing more than a "brain in a vat", wired up with electrodes stimulating the appropriate neurons at the behest of some computer. But even then, if we restrict our search for the self, the 'thing' of existence, to the brain, we still run into issues. You can't point to the 'consciousness' in a brain; my brain isn't consciousness any more than a live wire 'is' electricity. All you can point to is neurons and electrical signals running between them. But is that consciousness?
Imagine for the moment, that medical science has created a way to replace an individual neuron with an electronic device that functions exactly the same as the neuron, but isn't a living cell. We're a lot closer to that scenario than you might think. So, suppose that you replace a neuron in your brain with a neuro-chip (probably not what the scientists will call them). Intuitively, if the chip functions exactly like the neuron it replaces, then your consciousness should continue unaltered, right? But then you replace another. And another, and another, and another...And finally, your entire brain has been replaced with neuromechanics. What would happen to your consciousness? If you think there would be a perceptible difference, at what point would one notice it? When only 80% of your organic brain is left? 40% ? 10% ? 1% ? Does 'I' really exist at all?
Now let's shift our focus back to the body. I've already got an electronic brain, but what if I could swap out other body parts with better functioning prosthetics? What if we were able to build replacement organs, a liver, say, that functioned better than my natural liver? Or lungs that were more efficient at pulling oxygen from the air, and sending it to a heart that won't tire with age, or require constant maintenance in the form of aerobic activity?
I wouldn't hesitate to replace all of those organs with better-performing alternatives, and one day I may have the chance. But that's not what I'm getting at. As I replace more and more parts of my body with non-natural prosthetics, at some point do I stop being human? Our understanding of what it means to be human implies a lot of things, particularly when it comes to genetics. But if I've replaced my entire body with synthetics, I wouldn't really be human any more. But if not human, what would I be then, when my soul is no longer bound by the limits of biology?