The Times Australia
Fisher and Paykel Appliances
The Times World News

.

Could you move from your biological body to a computer? An expert explains ‘mind uploading’

  • Written by Clas Weber, Senior lecturer, The University of Western Australia
Could you move from your biological body to a computer? An expert explains ‘mind uploading’

Imagine brain scanning technology improves greatly in the coming decades, to the point that we can observe how each individual neuron talks to other neurons. Then, imagine we can record all this information to create a simulation of someone’s brain on a computer.

This is the concept behind mind uploading – the idea that we may one day be able to transition a person from their biological body to a synthetic hardware. The idea originated in an intellectual movement called transhumanism and has several key advocates including computer scientist Ray Kurzweil[1], philosopher Nick Bostrom[2] and neuroscientist Randal Koene[3].

The transhumanists’ central hope is to transcend the human condition through scientific and technological progress. They believe mind uploading may allow us to live as long as we want (but not necessarily forever). It might even let us improve ourselves, such as by having simulated brains that run faster and more efficiently than biological ones. It’s a techno-optimist’s dream for the future. But does it have any substance?

The feasibility of mind uploading rests on three core assumptions.

  • first is the technology assumption – the idea that we will be able to develop mind uploading technology within the coming decades
  • second is the artificial mind assumption – the idea that a simulated brain would give rise to a real mind
  • and third is the survival assumption – the idea that the person created in the process is really “you”. Only then does mind uploading become a way for you to live on.

How plausible is each of these?

Read more: Downloading our thoughts to the mainframe may be the stuff of science fiction — but humans have been imagining it for centuries[4]

The technology assumption

Trying to simulate the human brain would be a monumental challenge. Our brains are the most complex structures in the known universe. They house around 86 billion neurons and 85 billion non-neuronal cells[5], with an estimated one million billion neural connections. For comparison, the Milky Way galaxy is home to about 200 billion stars.

Where are we on the path to creating brain simulations? Right now, neuroscientists are drawing up 3D wiring diagrams (called “connectomes”) of the brains of simple organisms. The most complex comprehensive connectome we have to date is of a fruit fly larva[6], which has about 3,000 neurons and 500,000 neural connections. We might expect to map a mouse’s brain within the next ten years[7].

The human brain, however, is about 1,000 times more complex than a mouse brain[8]. Would it then take us 10,000 years to map a human brain? Probably not. We have seen astonishing gains in efficiency in similar projects, such as the Human Genome Project.

It took years and hundreds of millions of dollars to map the first human genome about 20 years ago. Today, the fastest labs can do it within hours[9] for about $100[10]. With similar gains in efficiency, we might see mind-uploading technology within the lifetimes of our children or grandchildren.

That said, there are other obstacles. Creating a static brain map is only one part of the job. To simulate a functioning brain, we would need to observe single neurons in action. It’s not obvious whether we could achieve this in the near future.

The artificial mind assumption

Would a simulation of your brain give rise to a conscious mind like yours? The answer depends on the connection between our minds and our bodies. Unlike the 17th-century philosopher Rene Descartes, who thought mind and body are radically different[11], most academic philosophers today think[12] the mind is ultimately something physical itself. Put simply, your mind is your brain.

Still, how could a simulated brain give rise to a real mind if it’s only a simulation?

Well, many cognitive scientists believe it’s your brain’s complex neural structure that is responsible for creating your conscious mind, rather than the nature of its biological matter (which is mostly fat and water).

When implemented on a computer, the simulated brain would replicate your brain’s structure. For every simulated neuron and neural connection there will be a corresponding piece of computer hardware. The simulation will replicate your brain’s structure and thereby replicate your conscious mind[13].

Today’s AI systems provide useful (though inconclusive) evidence for the structural approach to the mind. These systems run on artificial neural networks, which copy some of the brain’s structural principles. And they are able to perform many tasks that require a lot of cognitive work in us.

The survival assumption

Let’s assume it is possible to simulate a human brain, and that the simulation creates a conscious mind. Would the uploaded person really be you, or perhaps just a mental clone?

This harks back to an old philosophical puzzle: what makes it the case that when you get out of bed in the morning you’re still the same person who went to bed the night before?

Philosophers are divided broadly into two camps on this question[14]. The biological camp believes morning-you and evening-you are the same person because they are the same biological organism – connected by one biological life process.

The bigger mental camp[15] thinks the fact that we have minds makes all the difference. Morning-you and evening-you are the same person because they share a mental life. Morning-you remembers what evening-you did – they have the same beliefs, hopes, character traits, and so on.

So which camp is right? Here’s a way to test your own intuition: imagine your brain is transplanted into the empty skull of another person’s body. Is the resulting person, who has your memories, preferences and personality, you – as the mental camp thinks? Or are they the person who donated their body, as the biological camp thinks?

In other words, did you get a new body or did they get a new mind? A lot hangs on this question.

If the biological camp is right, then mind uploading wouldn’t work, assuming the whole point of uploading is to leave one’s biology behind. If the mental camp is right, there is a chance for uploading, since the uploaded mind could be a genuine continuation of one’s present mental life.

Wait, there’s a caveat

But wait: what happens when the original biological-you also survives the uploading process? Would you, along with your consciousness, split into two people, resulting in two of “you” – one in a biological form (B) and one in an uploaded form (C)?

No, you (A) can’t literally split into two separate people (B ≠ C) and be identical with both at the same time. At most, only one of them can be you (either A = B or A = C).

It seems most intuitive that, after a split, your biological form would continue as the real you (A = B), and the upload would merely be a mental copy. But that makes it doubtful that you could survive as the upload even in the case where the biological-you is destroyed.

Why would destroying biological-you magically elevate your mental clone to the status of the real you? It seems strange to think this would happen (although one view in philosophy[16] does claim it could be true).

Read more: A Stanford professor says science shows free will doesn’t exist. Here’s why he’s mistaken[17]

Worth the risk?

Unfortunately, the artificial mind assumption and the survival assumption can’t be conclusively empirically tested – we would actually have to upload ourselves to find out.

Uploading will therefore always involve a huge leap of faith. Personally, I would only take that leap if I knew for certain my biological hardware wasn’t going to last much longer.

References

  1. ^ Ray Kurzweil (www.thekurzweillibrary.com)
  2. ^ Nick Bostrom (nickbostrom.com)
  3. ^ Randal Koene (www.randalkoene.com)
  4. ^ Downloading our thoughts to the mainframe may be the stuff of science fiction — but humans have been imagining it for centuries (theconversation.com)
  5. ^ 85 billion non-neuronal cells (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
  6. ^ fruit fly larva (www.science.org)
  7. ^ within the next ten years (hms.harvard.edu)
  8. ^ 1,000 times more complex than a mouse brain (www.science.org)
  9. ^ within hours (med.stanford.edu)
  10. ^ $100 (www.genome.gov)
  11. ^ mind and body are radically different (plato.stanford.edu)
  12. ^ most academic philosophers today think (journals.publishing.umich.edu)
  13. ^ replicate your conscious mind (plato.stanford.edu)
  14. ^ two camps on this question (plato.stanford.edu)
  15. ^ bigger mental camp (journals.publishing.umich.edu)
  16. ^ one view in philosophy (iep.utm.edu)
  17. ^ A Stanford professor says science shows free will doesn’t exist. Here’s why he’s mistaken (theconversation.com)

Read more https://theconversation.com/could-you-move-from-your-biological-body-to-a-computer-an-expert-explains-mind-uploading-218035

Times Magazine

Yoto now available in Kmart and The Memo, bringing screen-free storytelling to Australian families

Yoto, the kids’ audio platform inspiring creativity and imagination around the world, has launched i...

Kool Car Hire

Turn Your Four-Wheeled Showstopper into Profit (and Stardom) Have you ever found yourself stand...

EV ‘charging deserts’ in regional Australia are slowing the shift to clean transport

If you live in a big city, finding a charger for your electric vehicle (EV) isn’t hard. But driv...

How to Reduce Eye Strain When Using an Extra Screen

Many professionals say two screens are better than one. And they're not wrong! A second screen mak...

Is AI really coming for our jobs and wages? Past predictions of a ‘robot apocalypse’ offer some clues

The robots were taking our jobs – or so we were told over a decade ago. The same warnings are ...

Myer celebrates 70 years of Christmas windows magic with the LEGO Group

To mark the 70th anniversary of the Myer Christmas Windows, Australia’s favourite department store...

The Times Features

What’s been happening on the Australian stock market today

What moved, why it moved and what to watch going forward. 📉 Market overview The benchmark S&am...

The NDIS shifts almost $27m a year in mental health costs alone, our new study suggests

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was set up in 2013[1] to help Australians with...

Why Australia Is Ditching “Gym Hop Culture” — And Choosing Fitstop Instead

As Australians rethink what fitness actually means going into the new year, a clear shift is emergin...

Everyday Radiance: Bevilles’ Timeless Take on Versatile Jewellery

There’s an undeniable magic in contrast — the way gold catches the light while silver cools it down...

From The Stage to Spotify, Stanhope singer Alyssa Delpopolo Reveals Her Meteoric Rise

When local singer Alyssa Delpopolo was crowned winner of The Voice last week, the cheers were louder...

How healthy are the hundreds of confectionery options and soft drinks

Walk into any big Australian supermarket and the first thing that hits you isn’t the smell of fr...

The Top Six Issues Australians Are Thinking About Today

Australia in 2025 is navigating one of the most unsettled periods in recent memory. Economic pre...

How Net Zero Will Adversely Change How We Live — and Why the Coalition’s Abandonment of That Aspiration Could Be Beneficial

The drive toward net zero emissions by 2050 has become one of the most defining political, socia...

Menulog is closing in Australia. Could food delivery soon cost more?

It’s been a rocky road for Australia’s food delivery sector. Over the past decade, major platfor...