stcredzero comments on Brief response to kalla724 on preserving personal identity with vitrification - Less Wrong

8 Post author: Synaptic 16 June 2012 01:28AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (32)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: stcredzero 16 June 2012 09:45:11AM 7 points [-]

Yes, my takeaway from this is that it might be better to chop up my brain (provided it could be done with minimal damage) and freeze the pieces. The person recovered isn't going to be exactly me. Will he be as close to me as myself waking the next day? Could we conceive of an empirical measure of such distance, even if we can't implement one yet?

Comment author: private_messaging 16 June 2012 10:03:31AM *  9 points [-]

I think the chopped up brain would be as much you as you after a concussion assuming no bulk damage within slices. The neurons along the cut lines are destroyed, but it is still small percentile of all the neurons, and it's not localized to one critical region. The neurons express distinct versions of a protein for self avoidance http://biologie.univ-mrs.fr/upload/p243/Dscam.pdf , so it is plausible that you can make sense of which wire goes where after scanning. Whereas the brain where all the strengths were screwed up by cryoprotectants, may likely be completely insane or entirely lack anything that you'd care to preserve.

This is assuming there's no gotcha like the memory storage being dependent on a dynamic process.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 16 June 2012 05:42:25PM 4 points [-]

I've argued elsewhere that this is the proper way to think about preserving identity. Being me is a property that various things possess to varying degrees, and to the extent to which I value continuing to exist I should value the extent to which things in the future are me.