On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is a variant of an argument that David Parfit uses in his book > "Reasons and Persons", where he considers a continuum from his mind > to that of Napoleon. (Don't flame me if I get the details wrong - the > essence is what is important). I hadn't read that book at the time I > wrote mine, otherwise, I would undoubtedly have cited it. > > Now in the case of Parfit's argument, I find considerable doubt that > the argument can be made to work. Whilst, if I randomly knocked out 1% > of your neurons, you will still be awake, and probably little > different from the experience, if I knocked out certain "keystone" (as > the concept is called in ecology) neurons to a level of 1% of all > neurons, your brain function would fall apart quite rapidly. Yet to > transition from your brain to that of Napoleons would require rewiring > those same keystone neurons, and that, I believe casts significant > doubt that the continuum is possible, even in principle. > > Now, we also know that infant minds are not a tabula rasa. So I am > sceptical that the transition of a dementiaed mind to an infant mind > is possible, for just the same reason. It doesn't have to happen by removal of neurons in a single individual. The transition could happen, for example, by having a series of separate individuals who share a proportion of their predecessors' memories. They don't even have to run on the same substrate, let alone the same brain. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
