Weird question I have about transferring minds...

I've been thinking about this for a while:

Let's say a guy doesn't like his body for some reason so he creates himself an artificial one instead and plans on transferring his mind to it and then destroy the original body. But he can only copy his mind to the artificial body, not completely move it, meaning that the original body will also have the same mind/thoughts, etc.

So now who is the real one? They would both share the exact same personality and traits and everything, no difference. And now the one in the artificial body is decided to destroy the original and forget all about it, but the original obviously doesn't want to die anymore. I should mention that none of them is now bad or good, they are both the exact way and none considers himself a copy.

I always wondered about this and could never quite decide on an answer, because while the artificial one would be a copy, the original did transfer his mind.

But as you said he didn't transfer his mind, he just copied it. Meaning that the new person is evil for wanting to murder somebody.

They are initially both the same. Albeit one being physically artificial. However, if neither of them kills the other and live life like that for a while, they'll eventually differ due to different experiences in life.

the original body is the original and the artificial one is the clone. I mean they'd both have the same perspective anyway so it's a moot point

I'm pretty sure I've seen that episode of Doctor Who. The clone is evil and the original body goes insane.

Watch The Prestige. This idea crops up in the movie and I like they way they handle it.

I am particularly qualified to answer this question, so let me say that these questions of truth and falsehood are irrelevant. The only matter of concern is the preservation of identity.

They're both real, and neither have rights over the other.

The original mind that was copied intended for the original to be destroyed afterwards therefore they both should retain and understand that knowledge. Done.

Are the bodies identical?

I don't care about the philosophical ramifications - I just want to look at my cloneboy's penis.

Get in there, get real dirty. Dig around down there, cause trouble. I want to see what that thing looks like to other people.

You've answered your own question by stipulating that the mind is copied and by distinguishing "the original" from "the one in the artificial body".

They're both real but one is the original and the other is the one in the artificial body.

No one wants to just preserve their mind. You want to preserve your self, and in order to preserve your self you must preserve your brain. Once your mind is gone you are no longer living. You can not transfer your brain to another person/computer and then live in that person/computer, someone very similar to you will, but you will die. On the other hand, what you want to is preserve your self (your brain) from being destroyed.

Read Altered Carbon

You spelled transfaring wrong.

@Darson said:

The original mind that was copied intended for the original to be destroyed afterwards therefore they both should retain and understand that knowledge. Done.

I agree, if he knew he could only copy his mind and still decided to do it and destroy the body after then he'll have known that his original self would essentially be committing suicide. There is no conflict of interest here. If he did the copying and then suddenly decides he doesn't want to die then he is an idiot that hasn't thought it through, and shouldn't be fiddling about with technology this powerful.

Watch The Prestige

I remember reading a story where there were teleport pods that created a copy of you in the second pod and copied your memory then dropped your original body through meat grinders. They new you never knew about that of course.

This is why you hold off on it until you can transfer the mind rather than copy it.

Basically, this happens.

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

@development said:

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

I think that, while this is interesting, the question "who is the real one?" comes from the fact that there are 2 individuals, not because there's a new body. Also, i think the one in the "new" body, will end up being different, because he knows his a clone, and wants to detroy the original one. The real one doesn't exist, because they are different, even if extremely similar.

clones don't get no rights.

same applies to the guy with the new body.

istn this the way teleportation might work one day? The way it works is that the body is scanned to the atom and the body is destroyed as the new one is made at the destination. Question is, is this the same person? the key thing being that every amino acid, every dna molecule, every fatty acid would be accurate to 99%(because there is no way to gurantee 100% in anything). It just happens to be made of a different set of atoms.

@MikeGosot said:

@development said:

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

I think that, while this is interesting, the question "who is the real one?" comes from the fact that there are 2 individuals, not because there's a new body. Also, i think the one in the "new" body, will end up being different, because he knows his a clone, and wants to detroy the original one. The real one doesn't exist, because they are different, even if extremely similar.

Well realistically, cloning is more akin to natural birth (embryo -> fetus -> baby -> adult), so OP would be staring at a test tube. ...but I'll indulge this unlikely future scenario either way...

If it happens like OP seems to fear, then his clone will pop out thinking it had just hit the "cloning" button, and -- depending on how rational OP is -- might either indignantly insist he must be the real one, or say "ah, shit." From there, who knows? They live their lives. They're different people, though.

edit: forgot crucial element of OP's scenario. He says he wants to "transfer" his mind by cloning it. Well, as stated before, that's just cloning, and he'd be killing himself. It sounds like the clone wouldn't even realize it, either. Morbidly ironic, or something.

Isn't this the plot to 6th day? Or at least kinda? This was also an episode of doctor who I think. I don't remember either of those that well though.

I would say the original is still the original in this situation. It's also not a transfer but a copy. The original mind is still intact. Who is the real one? That's very subjective. It kinda depends on whether you think the doctor from Star Trek: Voyager is a life-form or not. If yes, then they're both real. But you also have to ask yourself if you believe in a soul or not(this was brought up in one of the ghost in the shell movies). If you do believe in a soul then the original is the only real one. I would say they're both real.

@super2j said:

istn this the way teleportation might work one day? The way it works is that the body is scanned to the atom and the body is destroyed as the new one is made at the destination. Question is, is this the same person? the key thing being that every amino acid, every dna molecule, every fatty acid would be accurate to 99%(because there is no way to gurantee 100% in anything). It just happens to be made of a different set of atoms.

No. In that horrifying future, people will be killing themselves in favor of teleporting a clone self. I pray we live in a technocracy by then.

edit: the clone will-in fact think it was "successfully" teleported, though. So essentially such a horrifying future is very possible.

If you knew you had to destroy your old body after transferring your mind, both your new self and your old self would know this and act on it. 
 
Source: I have cloned myself 2 times.

There is no original. Or I guess they're both originals. The simple fact of being in a different body, especially a different looking one, living different things makes you a different person, even more so as years go by.

@development:

Doesn't that all depend on how you define self? In fact, you seem to be using two separate definitions for your argument (through body and through mind). I will say that there is a concept of self that reconciles this, though.

@development said:

@super2j said:

istn this the way teleportation might work one day? The way it works is that the body is scanned to the atom and the body is destroyed as the new one is made at the destination. Question is, is this the same person? the key thing being that every amino acid, every dna molecule, every fatty acid would be accurate to 99%(because there is no way to gurantee 100% in anything). It just happens to be made of a different set of atoms.

No. In that horrifying future, people will be killing themselves in favor of teleporting a clone self. I pray we live in a technocracy by then.

edit: the clone will-in fact think it was "successfully" teleported, though. So essentially such a horrifying future is very possible.

I dont know where i got this idea from. I know its not mine. But everytime i think about teleportation, I think of the logic behind it and it always bothers me. On on that same spectrum, wouldnt it also revolutionize surgery? If I wanted sick lobster claw hand, all someone has to do is create a model that works with the human body and can be placed at the right spot while teleporting. It would get to the point where we can do the equivalent of photoshop. Faces, eye colour, finger prints, hair, body, health problems, etc. Imagine using a hot key to remove all the tumors, mercury, tar, pathogens.

And the craziest part is that I think all this had been said in a Arnold Schwarzenegger movie about clones.... cant remember what it was called. In any case, aside from it being abused, I am not sure if the drawbacks out way the potential good it could do. At the same time, it would absolutely corrupt all humanity. The idea of individuality will be lost, no one will know restraint or hardwork because any disease or improvement (muscles) can be molded in.... OMG, no one would be able to tell a transvestite from the real thing.

This is actually really simple.

The guy had the intention of transfering his mind. But once the clone realizes that the original body still has the mind the clone will make the logical conclusion that the mind was a copy and not a transfer.

@development said:

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

Actually no. Your cells aren't always dying and recreated. Certain somatic cells like the brain and the heart cells stay with you for your entire life (besides the growth stage). The only way your body truly gets recycled is the fact that all the atoms that composed your body 5-10 years ago, aren't the same ones in your body now - but some cells never change.

@Castermhief117 said:

@development said:

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

Actually no. Your cells aren't always dying and recreated. Certain somatic cells like the brain and the heart cells stay with you for your entire life (besides the growth stage). The only way your body truly gets recycled is the fact that all the atoms that composed your body 5-10 years ago, aren't the same ones in your body now - but some cells never change.

Do you have some source or are you a biology major or something? I did some wikipedia page-flipping but I think I'm missing some connective threads here. I only barely passed basic high school biology, and have forgotten most of what I *did* remember, so excuse my ignorance. I'm sure I look real dumb, but I don't care.

@Video_Game_King said:

@development:

Doesn't that all depend on how you define self? In fact, you seem to be using two separate definitions for your argument (through body and through mind). I will say that there is a concept of self that reconciles this, though.

I don't know about all that. I stated it as I did to make sure to grab the understanding of people who aren't quite sure yet, themselves, whether the mind and body are biological objects. I've spoken with a number of people who refuse to believe that perceived "vibes" are merely a product of their brain, and insist it's some extra-dimensional sixth-sense. I'm strictly interested in the mainstream science aspect of this subject.

Aside from Altered Carbon (which is great) Old Man's War by John Scalzi is also a perfect one for this.

Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom also weirdly fits.

@development said:

Well realistically, cloning is more akin to natural birth (embryo -> fetus -> baby -> adult), so OP would be staring at a test tube. ...but I'll indulge this unlikely future scenario either way...

If it happens like OP seems to fear, then his clone will pop out thinking it had just hit the "cloning" button, and -- depending on how rational OP is -- might either indignantly insist he must be the real one, or say "ah, shit." From there, who knows? They live their lives. They're different people, though.

This is the exact gimmick of the Mauler Twins in the comic book Invincible.

@development said:

@Castermhief117 said:

@development said:

Everything you perceive comes from you brain. If you stop a brain from functioning, then your body -- mind and all -- stops... usually for good.

Better question: if your cells are constantly dying and being replaced every 7-10 years, then who's to say you're the same person you were 10 years ago? You literally and factually are not. Your memories tell you you're the same... but are you? Simply, no. If you want to be sure a being's attained the truest-possible form of life, then you need to create life in a more stable form... like a robot. But since we currently can't help the issue, there's no sense worrying about it. Besides, I'm no philosophologist.

Actually no. Your cells aren't always dying and recreated. Certain somatic cells like the brain and the heart cells stay with you for your entire life (besides the growth stage). The only way your body truly gets recycled is the fact that all the atoms that composed your body 5-10 years ago, aren't the same ones in your body now - but some cells never change.

Do you have some source or are you a biology major or something? I did some wikipedia page-flipping but I think I'm missing some connective threads here. I only barely passed basic high school biology, and have forgotten most of what I *did* remember, so excuse my ignorance. I'm sure I look real dumb, but I don't care.

I'm a biology major. But any intro to bio book will tell you that your heart and brain cells don't replicate.

Neither exist, they're both presentations of a self image brought upon by a feeling of self importance from being human.

if your thought patterns are merely copied and pasted then no, its not the same person.

if your consciousness is transmitted while you're awake, then yes you'd be the same person.

also, people die everytime they're transported in star trek and a copy replaces them, its kinda fucked up.

Why on earth would ever everever use teleportation if you killed your self to do it. The convenience of that simply is NOT worth the cost. That technology might as well not even exist since no would be fucking dumb enough to use it.

@Neonie said:

Why on earth would ever everever use teleportation if you killed your self to do it. The convenience of that simply is NOT worth the cost. That technology might as well not even exist since no would be fucking dumb enough to use it.

well if you are completely destroyed without a trace and replaced by a 100% identical copy, it'd be pretty easy for people to believe that the perfect copies are the original person and thus the technology is safe

"Real one" is an arbitrary designation. Presumedly they are each as much the real one as the other.

You read Spider-Man, don't you.

@Clonedzero said:

@Neonie said:

Why on earth would ever everever use teleportation if you killed your self to do it. The convenience of that simply is NOT worth the cost. That technology might as well not even exist since no would be fucking dumb enough to use it.

well if you are completely destroyed without a trace and replaced by a 100% identical copy, it'd be pretty easy for people to believe that the perfect copies are the original person and thus the technology is safe

We wouldn't build technology without first understanding what was behind it. If it's going to destroy all your cells and build new ones then that's not "safe", it's how the technology works, and it might be fine for objects, but if we built the technology, and knew how it worked, why on earth would we ever use it on our selves?

he'll still be looking out of his own eyes, since as you said, he copied, he didn't transfer.

the rest of the world wouldn't notice anything if it was a straight up 100% copy though.

@Alekss: They are both real if you think of a human as purely defined by their thoughts and memories. If the artifical body has the same mental capacity to store the mind of the copier, the next question is then "what defines a human being"? This leads to the discussion of the human soul and whether or not it originates from a religion based source, but that is an endless debate in itself. I look at this as the chicken and egg problem of who came first. A scientist would say the egg, through evolution. A creationist would say the chicken, though divine creation. So in the end the answer depends on your definition of a human being, meaning there is no definite answer.

@Clonedzero said:

also, people die everytime they're transported in star trek and a copy replaces them, its kinda fucked up.

Do you have a source for this? Since it's all imaginary, I see no reason why they would choose such a morbid route for how the technology works.

@believer258 said:

Read Altered Carbon

I fully support this message. Such an excellent hard boiled sci fi novel.

The real issue in this situation is that the original never gets what he wants. Whether or not the original dies, the copy gets what the original wants and the original never does.

The goal is for the original guy to have a better body, but he never actually achieves it if he can only copy his mind to the new body. He is never satisfied with the goal because there is no continuity of consciousness from the original to the copy. The best he can manage is to make a copy of himself who remembers what it was like to be in the old body and remembers what it's like to want to be in the new body, but the original never actually gets to feel what it's like to be in the new body.

It's like if a father who always dreamed of owning a certain car has a son and imparts the same dream of owning the same car to the son. If the son grows up and buys the car, The father could be satisfied vicariously that his son has the car but he never actually got the car. The son killing his father after getting the car doesn't change anything. The dad never actually has the car.

Actually, the most probable outcome id for the original to feel jealous of the copy for getting the new body, making him even less happy about the situation he was trying to solve in the first place.