Dualism on the chopping block

[Stoic]

Until you can show in principle how chemical electrical interactions can be turned into third person knowable beliefs or facts you are peeing into the wind. Otherwise you have a materialism of the gaps...

If memories are stored physically in the brain, as is generally believed, there is no reason to believe that those memories could not in principle be retrieved, given sufficiently advanced technology.

[seer]

If memories are stored physically in the brain, as is generally believed, there is no reason to believe that those memories could not in principle be retrieved, given sufficiently advanced technology.

But you would have to first know which memories were encoded/stored where. And what those memories were. I don't see any logical way around that. No matter how granular or specific the tests become you will only, and always, be looking at chemical electrical interaction. That is not information.

[Stoic]

But you would have to first know which memories were encoded/stored where. And what those memories were. I don't see any logical way around that. No matter how granular or specific the tests become you will only, and always, be looking at chemical electrical interaction. That is not information.

It is information, it's just encoded information. The trick is figuring out how to decode it.

Since the brain decodes that information very regularly, it should be possible in principle for us to figure it out.

[Machinist]

It is information, it's just encoded information. The trick is figuring out how to decode it.

Since the brain decodes that information very regularly, it should be possible in principle for us to figure it out.

Hey Seer, what Stoic said here...If it were possible in principle, would it necessarily contradict dualism?

[Stoic]

Hey Seer, what Stoic said here...If it were possible in principle, would it necessarily contradict dualism?

It wouldn't contradict dualism, but it would make dualism superfluous.

[seer]

It is information, it's just encoded information. The trick is figuring out how to decode it.

No, it is worse than that. No brain is encoded the same, my memories are not the same as yours. There is no standard that could apply across the board, that when certain neurons in my brain are firing that represent a specific memory that a third person or machine can know what those electrical impulses actually represent, unless I tell you. The exact same neurons in your brain could be firing with a completely different memory. So how in principle does a third person or machine decipher similar electrical impulses that hold completely different information?

[Machinist]

It wouldn't contradict dualism, but it would make dualism superfluous.

That's what I was thinking, but I don't know. It would all depend on what information was gained through decoding these chemical interactions, and what form that information was rendered. When you say, that it's all information, and that it's possible in principle to decode it, what are you imagining the data would look like? Are you suggesting some printout or graph, or some visual on a screen? Maybe some printout that shows that the secret number the subject was thinking of was 17!

If we are talking about recreating these first person experiences, then would we need, at the very very least, a test consciousness to experience these first person experiences, ala the Matrix. However, It would need to even go beyond the concepts of the Matrix, because in the story, people did not cross over into the domain of the first person private experiences of others.

What you're suggesting would require one consciousness to experience another individuals conscious experience. The dead end that I see, is that the one conducting the experiment, the one that crosses over into the subjective experience of another to gain some information, to know what it's like to be that person, would necessarily have to self report his experience once he returned to his native mind...and that's assuming his mind stayed intact and didn't fragment in the process.

[seer]

Hey Seer, what Stoic said here...If it were possible in principle, would it necessarily contradict dualism?

Not necessarily. I look at it that way (and it is only speculation). The mind/brain as it relates to our experiences, choices, behaviors, etc.. are imprinted on the soul or spirit. Perhaps like a song burned into a blank CD. That information holder (soul) is not physical and leaves the body after death. The personality is intact. And I'm not sure, this may be only a one way exchange. The physical imprints the spirit but the spirit may not in turn drive anything physical. Apart from our rational minds discovering spiritual truths. For instance that Jesus is the Son of God. Then we act on that belief.

[Stoic]

No, it is worse than that. No brain is encoded the same, my memories are not the same as yours. There is no standard that could apply across the board, that when certain neurons in my brain are firing that represent a specific memory that a third person or machine can know what those electrical impulses actually represent, unless I tell you. The exact same neurons in your brain could be firing with a completely different memory. So how in principle does a third person or machine decipher similar electrical impulses that hold completely different information?

There are pretty strong similarities between how information is encoded in one brain and another. In addition, memories are interconnected. Analyzing those connections could lead to deciphering which memories are which.

And even if you choose not to cooperate, you could be presented with images and sounds, and a machine could (in principle) detect how those are stored, and even detect memories that are elicited by those images and sounds. Same for the other senses.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...
https://www.politico.eu/article/mach...ts-protection/

[Stoic]

That's what I was thinking, but I don't know. It would all depend on what information was gained through decoding these chemical interactions, and what form that information was rendered. When you say, that it's all information, and that it's possible in principle to decode it, what are you imagining the data would look like? Are you suggesting some printout or graph, or some visual on a screen? Maybe some printout that shows that the secret number the subject was thinking of was 17!

My assumption is that it would be stored as binary data, and could be reported in whatever form the user could conceive of.

If we are talking about recreating these first person experiences, then would we need, at the very very least, a test consciousness to experience these first person experiences, ala the Matrix. However, It would need to even go beyond the concepts of the Matrix, because in the story, people did not cross over into the domain of the first person private experiences of others.

Yeah, I'm thinking along the lines of the movie Brainstorm. I remember laughing at the idea that an analog phone line could carry enough bandwidth for the purpose, but we are already at multiple gigabits, and no sign of slowing down.

What you're suggesting would require one consciousness to experience another individuals conscious experience. The dead end that I see, is that the one conducting the experiment, the one that crosses over into the subjective experience of another to gain some information, to know what it's like to be that person, would necessarily have to self report his experience once he returned to his native mind...and that's assuming his mind stayed intact and didn't fragment in the process.

The one reporting the experience might be an artificial intelligence, at least to start with.

[seer]

There are pretty strong similarities between how information is encoded in one brain and another. In addition, memories are interconnected. Analyzing those connections could lead to deciphering which memories are which.

Yes how they are encoded is very similar what is encoded is not. Look, you picture your dear mother in your mind, I picture my mom in my mind. The same set of neurons are firing in each of our brains, but we produce different images. Those images are not known unless we self-report. You can measure the electrical impulses but can not know the information they carry for every similar set of neurons in different people carry a different memory.

And even if you choose not to cooperate, you could be presented with images and sounds, and a machine could (in principle) detect how those are stored, and even detect memories that are elicited by those images and sounds. Same for the other senses.

I think that may be possible but that is not what I'm talking about. Not much different from self-reporting - you first have to know the image, then you can know that a specific set of neurons that are storing the image.

[seer]

My assumption is that it would be stored as binary data, and could be reported in whatever form the user could conceive of.

You would first have to know the binary code. That 1010 = ten for instance. Without know that code all you have are non descript electrical impulses. Or in our case 1010 = a picture of my mom, and 1010 = a picture of your mom. Same code but different information.

[Stoic]

You would first have to know the binary code. That 1010 = ten for instance. Without know that code all you have are non descript electrical impulses. Or in our case 1010 = a picture of my mom, and 1010 = a picture of your mom. Same code but different information.

I didn't mean that the information would be stored in the brain in binary. That seems wildly improbable. I was talking about how the information would be stored after it has been retrieved from the brain.

[Stoic]

Yes how they are encoded is very similar what is encoded is not. Look, you picture your dear mother in your mind, I picture my mom in my mind. The same set of neurons are firing in each of our brains, but we produce different images.

Probably not the same set of neurons, but neurons located in the same area of the brain, and probably a lot of similarities in how they fire.

Those images are not known unless we self-report. You can measure the electrical impulses but can not know the information they carry for every similar set of neurons in different people carry a different memory.



I think that may be possible but that is not what I'm talking about. Not much different from self-reporting - you first have to know the image, then you can know that a specific set of neurons that are storing the image.

But it's not self-reporting, in the sense that we don't have to trust you to report accurately.

[seer]

I didn't mean that the information would be stored in the brain in binary. That seems wildly improbable. I was talking about how the information would be stored after it has been retrieved from the brain.

Yes, my point is that you could not know what the memory was unless you first had the code. The electrical impulses in the brain or the 'high/low' of the binary are meaningless with out the code.