Trying to pull the orientation of this room towards the philosophical, I've been wondering what people would think of the following:

Suppose that some kind of external life-preserving machine could be hooked up to any kind of your body and keep that part alive and functioning without the rest of the body. E.g. if your head was chopped off, but were immediately hooked up to such a machine you'd be a head without a body which could see, hear, taste, smell and think regardless thereof.

Now what if you were split with some large blade so you were two halves (hooked up to two machines) with the left part of your brain in the one part and the right one in the other, and the parts were seperated by some wall or something. How would you then feel? Would there be a you? Where would your consciousnes be?

^^ is difficult. hmmm....whatver the left side thinks/does it would do, and whatever the right side thinks/does it would do on it's own as well. is this some new invention the scientists are trying to patent? crazy

>JM<

it would be impossible to be kept alive if u were chopped in half or sumthin like that, never under ny circumstances, but if, hypothetically, u were kept alive somehow, i dont think u would be conscious at all, like when somebody's brain dead but doctors can keep the persons body alive, i cant remember where i heard it but one half of the brain cant work dependant of the other... i think i may be gettin this mixed up?!?!?!?!?!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic Would there be a you? Where would your consciousnes be?

First, you have to define what consciousness is and I don't believe that this can be done precisely. Since we are constantly experiencing consciousness, how is one to look at what conciousness is from an outside perspective (ie outside of conciousness)?

The first part of your question depends on whether or not a self (or an ego that rules over the rest of the body) actually exists. Basically, is the mind seperate from the body, or are mind and body one?

___________________
sig edited: no political imagery allowed. please reref to the sig guidelines

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic Trying to pull the orientation of this room towards the philosophical, I've been wondering what people would think of the following: Suppose that some kind of external life-preserving machine could be hooked up to any kind of your body and keep that part alive and functioning without the rest of the body. E.g. if your head was chopped off, but were immediately hooked up to such a machine you'd be a head without a body which could see, hear, taste, smell and think regardless thereof. Now what if you were split with some large blade so you were two halves (hooked up to two machines) with the left part of your brain in the one part and the right one in the other, and the parts were seperated by some wall or something. How would you then feel? Would there be a you? Where would your consciousnes be?

That's a really hard question to answer. I would imagine, if you were still alive, that your subconscious would probably take over, and you'd be in a dream state. But tahts provided that the brain can interact with itself between each half. If you cut it right down the middle, you'd be dead. It just wouldn't function. Maybe if you took off chunks here and there, but I don't think you can evenly split the brain into halves, from a physiological standpoint.

___________________
jimtran.net

Well actually, there isn't a great deal holding the two seperate sides of the brain together, and indeed seperating the fibres (so that you're left, effectively, with the two sides being entirely seperate) has been used as a partial cure for epilepsy among other things.

So far as I can remember, people remain "fully conscious" after the operation (so they are not any less "intelligent" than before they went in), but can often have severe problems with memory and association (i.e. they would be shown a picture of a horse, but be unable to "conceptualise" it and identify it unless someone told them what it was). Also, when given a picture to draw having their two neural hemispheres seperated, they would only draw half, or part of the picture, and not realise without having it pointed out to them.

Then, if one half of the brain is defective or unoperational (i.e. in the case of brain tumours, dementia and so on) the other side of the brain begins to learn the tasks usually performed by the afflicted side of the brain (as the different sides usually perform different functions). So, if you were to split a human right down the middle and "hypothetically" keep them alive (I doubt it would be possible though) then you would have two halves of the brain entirely independant of the other (as opposed to partially independant in the case of the epilsepsy operation) and thus, effectively, have two seperate people, each with their own unique consciousness (although, I'm sure that they would share some common characteristics) and even though each side of the brain normally only peforms the functions specific to it, they can learn new tasks, and eventually, perhaps become fully conscious, and thus - instead of the divided body being considered "two halves" - perhaps they will attain a consciousness of their own and essentially constitute two seperate people, where originally there was only one.

So I think all that is right, but my knowledge of neurology is, understandably, a tad sketchy.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

could i just choose to die. being a shadow of ones self does not appeal to me in the slightest. in life ats all or nothing, in body mind and spirit. if you cant be complete why go on living.

___________________
i r teh hax
~~~Xxx(((TrancEaddicT Haiku/CQ Alliance 2005)))xxX~~~