Answer 114

	Sign In Sign-Up

Question 114

Do you identify yourself with your emotions, your rational thoughts, your memories, your 'soul' or your body? Which of these things do you think you could lose (theoretically speaking) and still be 'you'? Feel free to add any other aspects of 'self' that you think this question has overlooked.

I am my software, not my hardware, while understanding that the software gets inputs from the chemical state of the system. I wouldn't mind getting ported to a better platform, as long as the pleasure inputs stayed connected! (Scott Davidson #1045 - a computer scientist, if you couldn't have guessed)

There are many facets that make us up and various ones are dominant at any instant of time. These facets are dynamic and not static. As time moves on *you* have changed with it. (Stoney #9)

Well, I'd say emotions, rational thoughts, and memories. Without any one of them, I wouldn't be me. The lack of any of them would drastically change me. I'd say that *maybe* I'd be able to lose my memories and still be "me", but none of the rest. (Dan McEwen #1617)

All of the above are me. There is no way that I am aware of to separate 'me' from any of those things. My body cannot really be separated from 'me,' because everything that I consider to be part of my personality can be expressed in terms of interactions between cells and chemicals on the physiological level. If my mind and my body cannot be separated, then it goes without saying that the emotional and rational aspects of my mind cannot really be separated either. It all seems to make up a continuum that is only distinct when the endpoints are conisdered by themselves. (Roger Burks)

I consider myself to consist of everything packed into my brain - my memories and my emotions, primarily. Unfortunately, many of my emotions are governed by instincts of which I am only dimly aware most of the time, so I guess I need to include thise damn instincts, though I think (at this time, at least) that I could hapily lose the majority of my instincts and become a much better person for it! (Nemo #1331)

None of the above! The human being is a holistic system and must be viewed that way to be undersood properly. Our bodies and "selves" are one. There is no way to discreetly remove a "section" of ourselves and remain unchanged.

Think on the follwing two examples of our internal system as a unit: 1. When one is sick or poorly one's emotional state becomes less stable. Small things upset one with greater ease and an intensity not "normal" to our characters. A tendancy to be over-sentimental takes over those whose physical state has been weakened by tiredness, sickness or senility.

2. A rational person who has been seriously hurt(emotionally or physically) in some way may find their rationale replaced by venomous passion when confronted with those to blame(at least in the formerly/otherwise rational person's view) for that person's new predicament.

In other words just like all other phyiscal systems everything in the system is dependant on everything else to a greater or lesser extent. Removing or replacing any of the central constituents of any physical system will have serious consequences ofr the rest of the system. Thus removing something central to the human system like it's emotional capacity or whatever rationale it has will have far reaching effects on the rest of the system.

"You" are the sum total of your parts and thus removing or changing any of them in any way will also change "you". The magnitude of the change involved will reflect the magnitude of the change in your "self (Ciaran O'Neill)

I am until I am not. The brain is the deal. I happen to have a lot of matter attached to the brain which both makes the brain work (intake of oxygen, water, food) and gives it something to do (think, ponder, write newsgroup posts with attached fingers/hands/arms/torso/neck/head-brain, have sex to create other brains and experience pleasure though, well, you get the picture).

If the brain known as I was externalized (downloaded) and given sensory input, I'm sure I would be I although the I that I would be would likely be a different I than this I, an altered I if you will.

I presently consist of memes (stored in my brain) and genes (stored in the matter of my brain and the matter to which my brain is attached), with my meme pool ever-growing and my gene pool interacting with my environment in ways unknown/subconscious to I.

What would I be were I to lose almost all my memes (memories/input as happens due to some accidents or illnesses)? I would be a meme-reduced I, but depending on the cause/result of the meme reduction, an I with potential to increase my meme pool and perhaps restore the lost memes/ lost portion of I.

As with most things in life, I is not just on/off but is instead ruled by fuzzy logic so it's likely that any transition from I to not I would go through a faze of mostly-I, semi-I, mostly not-I, before reaching no I.

Unfortunately, with the cessation of all environmental support for I, I will turn off and unless resuscitated, no I (in this plain of existence) is the deal. If I is not, that matter attached to I (heart, organs, limbs) used by others (in body transplants) is not I but instead becomes part of the others which use that which was formerly attached to I.

It's highly likely that in the coming century, humankind will advance to altered states of being, with the I having instantaneous sensory inputs direct to consciousness, from a variety of devices extant from the body, feeding sensory input directly into the brain.

A virtual world with the I becoming immortal?

That's possible some day after computers along with bio-mechanical and gene-engineered devices grow so intelligent that the I's known as human will be relatively lonely/inferior in our old skin-wrapped attachments and will seek out ways to merge with our superior offspring.

I predict we'll be successful in that endeavor and there will no longer be any desire for god(s) by any entities formerly known as humans as we will have surpassed and exceeded that passe mythical construct, replacing it with a super-evolved existence/reality far beyond the fearful myths of humanity's infancy. (Dan Fake #1468)

There isn't one seperable, identifiable thing that I can label as "me." I would say it is primarily the interactions between memories and thought patterns, but those are (and have been) influenced by my physical body. Emotions I would regard as an output, an indication of how I react to certain stimuli. Using emotions (or emotional responses) to "define" who I am seems like a waste of time to me.
I don't tend to regard my body as part of myself. I like to think of myself as pure intellect, but I know that isn't a true picture. My brain is supported by (and a part of) my body, influenced by chemicals in my system, affected by conditions around me. If I lost an arm or a leg, or was paralyzed, I think I would become a different person. I certainly wouldn't be who I am if my brain were damaged, but I wouldn't consider my brain to "embody" the true me.
If I had to pin it down to one thing, I'd have to say that my memories are what defines who I am, if you use a liberal enough definition of "memory." Not just memorized facts, but memories of emotion, of processes, of how to tackle a problem. That is what differentiates me from other people: my memories, my experiences, the way I react to different situations. And that is the one thing that I don't want to lose; the thing that, if it disappeared, I wouldn't be me. (Carl Funk #1229)

Click here to return to master question page.