On Mar 1, 5:41 pm, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It depends how good the artificial brain stem was. The more of the
> > brain you try to replace, the more intolerant it will be, probably
> > exponentially so. Just as having four prosthetic limbs would be more
> > of a burden than just one, the more the ratio of living brain to
> > prosthetic brain tilts toward the prosthetic, the less person there is
> > left. It's not strictly linear, as neuroplasticity would allow the
> > person to scale down to what is left of the natural brain (as in cases
> > where people have an entire hemisphere removed), and even if the
> > prosthetics were good it is not clear that it would feel the same for
> > the person. If the person survived with an artificial brain stem, they
> > may never again feel that they were 'really' in their body again. If
> > the cortex were replaced, they may regress to infancy and never be
> > able to learn to use the new brain.
> It's not a completely adequate artificial brain stem or cortex if it
> doesn't work properly, is it? Just as an artificial heart that doesn't
> increase output appropriately in response to exercise is not
> completely adequate, though it might be adequate to prevent the person
> from dying immediately.
That's what I'm saying. It may be the case though that no artificial
organ can be completely adequate in every sense - or even a
transplant. It's one thing when it's a kidney, but when it's a brain,
I don't think we can assume anything.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at