What's the consensus on transhumanism/brain uploading?

We are now requiring that new registrants confirm their request for an account by email.  Once you complete the "Sign Up" process to set up your user name and password, please send an email to the New Accounts Administator to obtain new account approval.

Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!
    • New

    Seeing the advances in AI and robotics right now, it seems increasingly believable that by the end of the century, we may be able to leave our human bodies and continue our existence in man-made devices and machinery, and these may not only allow us to continue our existence but also inhabit better "bodies" than our biological ones. Stronger, easier to maintain or alter, less fragile, etc...

    Pop culture makes this look scary, but I think this could have the potential to give us far better lives. I'm curious what others here think about the idea, though. What's the Epicurean view of transhumanism?

    • New

    My first thought would be that since there is nothing divine or non-natural about the human mind, this is probably going to happen in the future and is definitely something to think about.

    I would see it is as the expected way forward and that we should bring to bear on the opportunities and issues all our standard methods of analysis to try to get it right.

    I've never thought that Epicurus has anything bad to say about variety or the desirabilty of life extension. Yes it's true that life doesn't get "better" simply by being longer, and we need not regret that at least for our present technology death at no more than about 100 years is the natural result of the way things currently are.

    But Epicurus clearly says that "life is desirable" in the letter to Menoeceus so I would not hesitate to take the opportunity to live longer where it appeared to me that the pleasure would outweigh the pain.

    • New
    Quote from Cassius

    My first thought would be that since there is nothing divine or non-natural about the human mind, this is probably going to happen in the future and is definitely something to think about.

    I would see it is as the expected way forward and that we should bring to bear on the opportunities and issues all our standard methods of analysis to try to get it right.

    I've never thought that Epicurus has anything bad to say about variety or the desirabilty of life extension. Yes it's true that life doesn't get "better" simply by being longer, and we need not regret that at least for our present technology death at no more than about 100 years is the natural result of the way things currently are.

    But Epicurus clearly says that "life is desirable" in the letter to Menoeceus so I would not hesitate to take the opportunity to live longer where it appeared to me that the pleasure would outweigh the pain.

    Yeah, I think instinct is what it all boils down to. I wouldn't worry about trying to justify it. If you have to opportunity to extend your life, and your instincts drive you to do that, then go for it. At the very least, it'll spare you the pain from the process of dying.

    • New

    Further improving bodies with implants, exoskeletons, brain interfaces and the like and extending lifespans is likely to happen. Full transhumanism by leaving the body/uploading something to machinery is a delusion. What can be uploaded is a reductionist copy of some aspects. I would not consider that as continuation of my existence. Transhumanism is an idea motivated by fear of death. Getting rid of the fear of death in accordance with Epicurus' philosophy and modern science and eventually embracing death when it happens (or suicide when pain permanently outweighs pleasure) makes more sense to me.

    • New

    Depends entirely on the nature of the technology as well as the future state of the world and anyone I care to have in my life going forward, but I don't think about life extension nor would I ever willingly choose it. I distrust human society and it's motivations even in these relative good times enough to make the decision that anything that can artificially extend my life through augmentation or alteration of my body can most assuredly be used to keep me artificially alive for who knows how long, and persist in whatever manner of pain and discomfort anyone who assumes control so chooses. It's already hard enough for me to clear out and banish the wealth of horrid thoughts and images society presents me with, let alone giving it an inch more.


    Maybe some point humanity may become more Godlike, in our Epicurean sense, and true societies as extensions of Blessedness among true Friends could flourish; but that is so far and remote from humanity as it exists now to ever consider trusting my entire body-soul with these ya-hoos. As I reason, Death far outweighs whatever benefit that could be garnered by potentially having more life and potentially losing that control over being able to choose pleasurable things and avoid pain.

    Edited once, last by Adrastus (November 24, 2025 at 8:42 AM).

    • New

    My thoughts on transhumanism (e.g., uploading consciousness to a machine or transferring it to another brain) are directly akin to my thoughts on the "pleasure machine": WHO owns the hardware doing the storage or transfer? What are their motivations? Follow the money!

    Quote from Martin

    Full transhumanism by leaving the body/uploading something to machinery is a delusion.

    I agree with Martin and Adrastus on this. From what I read, there is a lot more going on with consciousness than simply electrical patterns to be transposed to some hardware. I'm not talking about woo/supernatural goings-on. Gut bacteria seem to have a direct effect on mood/feeling for one thing. Mood/feeling are part of our consciousness. Anyone thinking we can "live forever" through technology is simply transposing the age-old idea of Heaven into a technological paradigm.

    • New

    I need to state for the record that I have no problem with life-saving and life-enhancing medical science. Treatments and therapies like prostheses, vaccinations, surgery under anesthesia, cochlear implants, MRIs, pacemakers, and all the others that bring a good quality of life to those who would have died or would have lived lives of pain in decades and centuries past is a boon of modern medical science. Sign me up.

    Where I draw the line is at those who feel life should be extended at any cost when death is inescapable. Trust me. I know firsthand how hard it is to "let someone go." In the past, this simply wasn't an option. They just died. Ventilators etc were not an option. Medical science now lets hearts beat and lungs breathe with no hope of recovery or consciousness. That's not life. To paraphrase Dr. Malcom in Jurassic Park, just because they can, they don't stop to ask if they should.

    The other line is at those who feel death is something to be conquered. Like dying is some kind of failure. And, while not believing in a god or a supernatural afterlife, they place technology in the role of God and technological fantasies in place of Heaven. Extending a good quality of life is admirable IN THIS LIFE. Trying to "cheat death" by cryonic suspension, computer upload, brain transplant, and similar speculative fiction tropes robs people of taking pleasure in THIS one precious life that is here and now.

    • New
    Quote from Don

    My thoughts on transhumanism (e.g., uploading consciousness to a machine or transferring it to another brain) are directly akin to my thoughts on the "pleasure machine": WHO owns the hardware doing the storage or transfer? What are their motivations? Follow the money!

    If you want to explore what can happen in a future with this capability, check out “Upload” TV series. [Prime Video 2020-2025]

    Upload (TV Series 2020–2025) ⭐ 7.8 | Comedy, Mystery, Sci-Fi
    30m | TV-MA
    www.imdb.com


    I agree with Martin and others that uploading your brain is not a viable alternative. At what age do you upload, before [brain cells start dying ar age 25?)?

    Patrikios

    • New
    Quote from Patrikios

    I agree with Martin and others that uploading your brain is not a viable alternative. At what age do you upload, before [brain cells start dying ar age 25?)?

    I interpret the original question (and most hypotheticals like this) not to refer to now ("...IS a viable alternative") but to whether such a thing will be possible in the future with more advanced technology.

    Is there is some theoretical barrier or insuperable obstacle that will always be impossible to overcome no matter what the technology?

    • New
    Quote from Cassius

    Is there is some theoretical barrier or insuperable obstacle that will always be impossible to overcome no matter what the technology?

    I think so. The whole premise seems to me to be akin to "stealing someone's soul" simply dressed up in techno-babble and wishful thinking. The idea that one could "upload" one's consciousness to a computer is based on the idea that a person's being is reducible to some kind of (let's say Aristotelian) essence, usually thought of as some kind of electrical signal that can be read and copied into some kind of a computer-like machine. Or think of a Star Trek transporter that "reads" the individual's construction, breaks it down into a signal, and reconstitutes that person at a distance. For one thing there, it's not necessarily the same "person." See this video:

    The video also brings up the idea of "What is consciousness?" Which is really what this question of uploading for immortality purposes hinges on. To upload one's consciousness means we have to define consciousness itself. Good luck with that! One intriguing idea is the embodied cognition theory:

    Embodied cognition - Wikipedia
    en.wikipedia.org

    Nevertheless, as Epicureans, we insist the mind and body depend on each other. The mind does not exist independent of the body and both die together. In light of this, the mind cannot exist separate from the body, so the mind (our essence) is not able to be uploaded or separated from the body. There's no "me" without my body and mind working together. Giving into the idea of some future technology being able to do this can be fun, but ultimately it's dangerous to our life here and now because it literally denigrates this physical flesh as lesser than some fanciful pure mental existence that is somehow better than our current way of living. That smacks of heaven-talk and a better next world which is anathema to Epicurean philosophy.

    • New

    I'm in agreement with Don on this issue as far as I can tell. His post above points out what I have considered the basic problem, which is that the uploading idea, as far as I know, is typically presented as "a brain in a box", which is to me obviously untenable.

    The more "realistic" approach would be to re-create a fully functioning brain in a fully functioning body, in a real world environment. This would seemingly increase the complexity of the problem exponentially, but might make the idea of reproducing consciousness captivating for those who take pleasure in pondering hypotheticals.

    As for me, I'm off to the gym to work off my Thanksgiving feast. Bottoms up!

    • New

    I can see your point. I don't have much to argue about. However, I think you oversimplify the mind-body idea.

    Our current understanding of the mind is that it is just brain activity. Something akin to a computer program (or an analog circuit if you're more familiar with electronics). It seems that our experience is directly produced by neural activity. So, science indicates that our mind specifically is the electrical activity in our body (our brain more specifically). That's what we call our "conscious experience." It's electrical activity. Computation maybe.

    So, yes, we ARE our body, just a specific part of it. We don't die or stop experiencing when we lose our foot, but we do die and stop experiencing when we lose our brain.

    To say that brain uploading is possible is not a denial of the inherently materialistic nature of consciousness, rather it's an embrace of the idea. If consciousness or experience is material, than through proper interfacing with a computer that eventually replicates the brain activity entirely, the same individual who once experienced their existence in a body of flesh could eventually experience it in a body of silicon. Just like how the same computer program that once ran on a clockwork computer can be made to run on an electronic one.

    • New
    Quote from Godfrey

    The more "realistic" approach would be to re-create a fully functioning brain in a fully functioning body, in a real world environment. This would seemingly increase the complexity of the problem exponentially, but might make the idea of reproducing consciousness captivating for those who take pleasure in pondering hypotheticals.

    Indeed. Maybe in the far future, lab-grown clones - independent of the usual way of creating humans - will be able to be grown. They would arguably have consciousness, but there's a whole genre of sci-fi where lab-grown humanoids and cyborgs create issues. For a humorous take, see the Murderbot Diaries. But this angle still doesn't address the transfer of an older person to a younger body (see John Scalzi's Old Man's War for an interesting and often humorous take on this): What's being transferred? Even brain or head transplants present an infinite number of issues (See Mr. Humble and Dr. Butcher for a fascinating nonfiction book on that!!)

    • New
    Quote from Godfrey

    As for me, I'm off to the gym to work off my Thanksgiving feast. Bottoms up!

    Count your blessings friend. Not only did we have a big dinner yesterday, we have a birthday today. And I'm out of town with family for the week. All my efforts over the last months were for nothing! ||

Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com

What's the best strategy for finding things on EpicureanFriends.com? Here's a suggested search strategy:

  • First, familiarize yourself with the list of forums. The best way to find threads related to a particular topic is to look in the relevant forum. Over the years most people have tried to start threads according to forum topic, and we regularly move threads from our "general discussion" area over to forums with more descriptive titles.
  • Use the "Search" facility at the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere." Also check the "Search Assistance" page.
  • Use the "Tag" facility, starting with the "Key Tags By Topic" in the right hand navigation pane, or using the "Search By Tag" page, or the "Tag Overview" page which contains a list of all tags alphabetically. We curate the available tags to keep them to a manageable number that is descriptive of frequently-searched topics.