Humans, Cyborgs, Androids, Clones, Souls & Karma

[MugattuHasGotchu]

***CONTAINS LO VOL 10 SPOILERS***







So I was having a discussion over on imdb about characters who are artificial yet who still appear to have souls and the nature of humanity in artificial life forms.

Basically we have all these great characters who live and breath and are each unique, but they're completely artificial. Sechs, Elf and Zwolf are just copies of Gally with brainchips, but can we accept them as actual individuals with all the rights and respect afforded to biological characters? In conventional thinking they aren't even technically cyborgs, but rather androids with impeccable AI. The conventional answer would be no, but the Gunnm universe challenges us to rethink what it is to be human.

Gally certainly believes she's human, but as of Vol 10 we find out that since the moment she awoke back in Vol 1, her brain's been replaced by a brainchip too. Take it a step further and we find out her original brain in the first Gunnm series appeared to have been some genius' creation as well. So now that she is (and in fact always has been) 100% artificial, where exactly does her humanity lie? Does she still have a soul? Did she ever have one on page besides her fully human flashbacks?

Are souls, like friends and enemies, a misplaced value or non-factor in karmatron theory? Or is there a place still for the ethereal in Nova's unified cosmology? And if there is a place for such things, can distinct souls imbue countless individual clones and copies? Maybe if you believe in infinite consciousness or an omnipotent god perhaps?

[Dream]

***CONTAINS LO VOL 10 SPOILERS***

Take it a step further and we find out her original brain in the first Gunnm series appeared to have been some genius' creation as well.

Hmm, not sure to understand this part. as far as I understand it. Gally "original" brain is a normal brain, with some nanotech enhancement.

[HumanRage]

the only thing that matters is self-consciousness.

flesh and bones are same to motors and hydraulics.

[MugattuHasGotchu]

I didn't take it as a simple modification of her brain via nanotech, but rather as her brain actually being composed of a different material than a normal human brain and thus not an organic structure. I suppose it may have been the result of some sort of enhancement process, but then either the original brain matter was transformed into this new material or completely replaced atom by atom. Either way she was definitely fully human once, but the point at which she lost all of her biological make-up is not 100% clear.

Regarding self-consciousness being the only qualifying factor, I can't help but wonder if there's more needed than just that. A lot of science-fiction has made the consensus that we are nothing more than highly complex machines as well as the assertion that sentience affords, for lack of a better word, humanity. This seems to be the logical ultimate conclusion, but what if the spark of life, of the quality found in biological living things like plants and animals, is more elusive than we can imagine?

I guess it really depends on what school of thought you belong. A rational scientific outlook has no preconceived notion of biological superiority over an identical synthetic analog so being able to make something dead live again is as good as the "real deal". Whereas an irrational spiritual outlook argues that there is an ethereal realm into which science cannot enter and there is a qualitative difference between what god and non-gods create.

So far Nova can do some pretty miraculous things, but he hasn't created something living from absolutely nothing. If he did do that, and somehow I don't entirely doubt that he could, would that make him a god?

Here's an interesting video that has something to do with this line of questioning cosmology: what we still don't know

[HumanRage]

the body's nervous system is participating at the background signal (along with the five senses) keeping the neural network in action.

so yes, self consciousness is kept alive by the background presence of the body, but since this is only information coming through the nerve, it can be simulated artificially (and you have to, because without feedback, how can you walk or move ?)

i think (in fact, i'm sure) that we are mere biological machines, incredibly complex biological machines. we have yet plenty of things to understand before we can emulate a consciousness or move a living being into a device, but since there is no magic, god or soul, it is definitely possible, just a matter of engineering.

[hepar]

I believe that robots with A.I. go to heaven after their death. Why not?

[Akumeno]

and robots dream of electrical sheeps

[moooV]

I believe that robots with A.I. go to heaven after their death. Why not?

Smoke too much... 0======~~~~~~~~

[MugattuHasGotchu]

i think (in fact, i'm sure) that we are mere biological machines, incredibly complex biological machines. we have yet plenty of things to understand before we can emulate a consciousness or move a living being into a device, but since there is no magic, god or soul, it is definitely possible, just a matter of engineering.

I agree with that to an extent.

Yes we are biological machines that may one day be replicated by someone or something with a fuller understanding of nature.

However I'm not so sure about the self-consciousness argument as it relates to a character like Sechs. Or an even more primitive AI character for that matter.

In practical terms it becomes more a question of social dynamics than anything so fantastical as an eternal soul, of course. But I guess asking a society to value artificial life when it doesn't even value human life enough not to harm or kill is asking too much. Still there are countless examples of AI fighting for respect amongst biologicals. I don't see that conceit going away without much difficulty. It would be more intrinsic than racism.

However, in this sterile oblivion of Nihilism, how are we so sure that when we die we do simply blink out? How do we know there isn't an eternal soul that's been factored in and accomodated for in the formula of creation and reality? Is that too optimistic a notion?

I believe that robots with A.I. go to heaven after their death. Why not?

As per the above scenario, if our AI creations didn't have the benefit of an eternal soul factored into their creation, wouldn't that mean they don't go to heaven?

[hepar]

As per the above scenario, if our AI creations didn't have the benefit of an eternal soul factored into their creation, wouldn't that mean they don't go to heaven?

I believe that eternal soul and self-consciousness are indivisible. I believe that Pinocchio had soul and he had no need to become a real boy to prove it(*), because I believe that God is kind, and He will accept the existance of AI - after all it's not robot's fault that he wasn't born, but was made. "It's never crime - just to exist".

*well, I didn't actually read this story, or saw a cartoon... so...

[MugattuHasGotchu]

Pinocchio, Sechs, Data, etc are easy to relate to because they come in anthropomorphic form.

But what about HAL who runs my space ship or the central AI persona from I, Robot, who don't eve have a body?

What about the T-1000 or the T-800 who can be switched between learning and non-learning modes? Would that be like a human on personality-suppressing drugs?

Or what about Data before his emotion chip was installed? He wasn't capable of developing emotions before it was introduced to him, yet his positronic brain mind is considered fully sentient. Is that like a psychopath who is detached from emotions?

Or what about a cloned brain that has all the potential for self-consciousness, but none of the tools for awareness? Does a cloned heart get a soul?

And how do less complex living animals or even plants fit in? We have no reason to suspect they have any kind of intelligence, but they're still living things.

Perhaps we are just nothing in the end and heaven and eternity is just the wishful thinking of a machine designed to survive at all costs projecting that programming beyond the grave? That's pretty depressing if it's true. I think I'd rather stay in doubt than ever know that for certain. Then again, maybe not...

I believe that eternal soul and self-consciousness are indivisible.

Interesting idea. Maybe consciousness is soul? You have this infinite ocean of consciousness that just flows over the entire universe and when a vessel becomes properly "shaped", consciousness/soul flows into it and is contained. Once that vessel breaks it can no longer contain the consciousness/soul and it flows out like a broken glass. I like it.

[Cailon]

It all started more philosophical, from a scientific view. But now we drift into a matter of spirituality.
Let's don't guess about souls and stuff which have no evidence (I dont want to disappoint someone. Maybe there is something like a soul, but we cant prove it (yet?)).
I too think self awareness is the key to define intelligence. This self awareness contains to completely think and decide on yourself.
I wouldnt say there is something like a "primitive AI character". Either you are self aware or not. Even a human baby is not self aware, it has no intelligence, but soon it will develope it. With this definition, imo we could also certify Monkeys, Whales or Dolphins intelligence.

In todays science, we are trying to develop artificial intelligence and everyone talks, how great and smart the new PC/ Mac generation is. In fact, the computers are getting faster and faster, but they are nearly as dumb as they where in the 80s. They cant truly think or decide on their own. But they aren't only a pile of disks, cables and diodes, they CAN do things on their own, IF we feed them with every single instruction. They are just robots (= means slaves). I think "robot" is the missing term, its fills the gap between "just a machine" (like i.e. a car engine) and "A.I."

- the T-800 (besides the fact, that it makes no sense to install a lern- dont- leran switch into a killing machine): switch off: imo not an A.I., just a state of the art high- tech bot. switch on: A.I., learning, deciding, thinking.
- same with T-1000
- HAL: definitely A.I., Dave.
and so on.

If a being is intelligent enough to produce a copy of itself (an A.I.), it can produce thousands of them. But being an A.I., no copy will be equal to another.
On the other hand, if we ask: What makes a human human? Then, besides self-awareness, we'd have to define factors like appearance. HAL dont have a human form at all. But what about the borderline cases: the changing sex of Sechs or Tojis huge body? Is only the outer apperance important and it doesnt matter if you have a brain or a chip?

[Sergio Nova]

I believe that robots with A.I. go to heaven after their death. Why not?

Do robots die?

[hepar]

You have this infinite ocean of consciousness that just flows over the entire universe and when a vessel becomes properly "shaped", consciousness/soul flows into it and is contained. Once that vessel breaks it can no longer contain the consciousness/soul and it flows out like a broken glass. I like it.

Well I don't know what to believe into... I myself believe that as soon as you gain your consciousness the soul borns or, you can say, God gives you one. And when vessel breaks it goes to heaven. So when you live - you live into a two worlds at the same time: the rational, and irrational which correlate with each other. So you go on living after your body dies.
And that's why robots can have a soul, clones can have it either, and man who has an amnesia obtains another soul.
Furthermore... Brain is the only vessel of the soul, so Alita and Zekka are only replicas, that means that they have their own souls, what makes them human beings separated from the original.

If a being is intelligent enough to produce a copy of itself (an A.I.), it can produce thousands of them. But being an A.I., no copy will be equal to another.

That is individuality. Well, I guess every soul has to be individual. Another important thing is a freedom of thoughts. If creature can understand that it's exist and it doesn't (or does) want to die - that will mean the soul for me - the existance of inner world.

On the other hand, if we ask: What makes a human human? Then, besides self-awareness, we'd have to define factors like appearance. HAL dont have a human form at all. But what about the borderline cases: the changing sex of Sechs or Tojis huge body? Is only the outer apperance important and it doesnt matter if you have a brain or a chip?

Since outer appearence is important only in relarionships with objects in outer world that means that it has no value in the inner world (directly). So within you can define yourself as a human being or not. But if you can define yourself as something - that already means that you're human (as a creature with a soul). However only creatures with a living brains can be defined as "homo sapiens" - Tipherians and androids are not biological humans - rather an artificial humans.

Do robots die?

Death is the end of an existance. If you erase the robot's memory and reinstall their OS they will die. Because the container of their soul is an information within. You cannot reinstall or delete the human brain, so the information and biological brain are individible.
I cannot yet define when robot will die in my theory. It could be that they're dying every time you shut them down (humans cannot be shutted down).

[MugattuHasGotchu]

It all started more philosophical, from a scientific view. But now we drift into a matter of spirituality.
Let's don't guess about souls and stuff which have no evidence (I dont want to disappoint someone. Maybe there is something like a soul, but we cant prove it (yet?)).

Actually I believe I started this thread from a more open point of view than strictly a scientific one. A purely scientific philosophy based only on evidence and proof has no bearing on questioning the humanity of artificial life because it really hasn't even proved the humanity of organic life. It hasn't proved our purpose and it hasn't even proved our existence. It is those notions of a spiritual philosophy that even allows us to question the value of an AI because it was only in faith that humans beings asserted our own value.

I too think self awareness is the key to define intelligence.
I wouldnt say there is something like a "primitive AI character". Even a human baby is not self aware, it has no intelligence, but soon it will develope it. imo we could also certify Monkeys, Whales or Dolphins intelligence.

Self-awareness/consciousness/sentience is more involved than simply having intelligence. I think we're in danger of confusing terminology here. AI does not automatically equal sentience. I do believe that there can be differing degrees of AI just as there are differing degrees of intelligence in animals. We can easily prove that my dog isn't as intelligent as a human, but we cannot easily prove that she doesn't have self-awareness or that she doesn't have the genetic potential to become as intelligent. Yet she has feelings and desires and preferences and a distinct personality and value to me as a companion and living being. Would you consider her or any other animal nothing more than a sophisticated robot?

If a being is intelligent enough to produce a copy of itself (an A.I.), it can produce thousands of them. But being an A.I., no copy will be equal to another.

I don't understand this part. Humans are only theoretically intelligent enough to produce copies of ourselves. Normally we just do it the natural way we were programmed. So it is unknown if any copies of ourselves we make will be equal to either ourselves or each other. I would argue that an AI would be more likely to copy itself exactly because it would probably have a less complex structure than biologicals, assuming that sentience is even possible in something less complex than our brains.

On the other hand, if we ask: What makes a human human? Then, besides self-awareness, we'd have to define factors like appearance. HAL dont have a human form at all. But what about the borderline cases: the changing sex of Sechs or Tojis huge body? Is only the outer apperance important and it doesnt matter if you have a brain or a chip?

I don't think appearance would be more important than self-awareness. It certainly affects the way we interact with other self-aware individuals (which goes back to social dynamics), but I don' think it affects whether or not we have intrinsic value. If my consciousness were downloaded into a brainchip hooked up only to a battery and I no longer had any way of interacting with the outside world, but was still aware of myself, it would be a nightmarish hell, but "I think, therefore I am" still applies.

Furthermore... Brain is the only vessel of the soul, so Alita and Zekka are only replicas, that means that they have their own souls, what makes them human beings separated from the original.

That is individuality. Well, I guess every soul has to be individual. Another important thing is a freedom of thoughts. If creature can understand that it's exist and it doesn't (or does) want to die - that will mean the soul for me - the existance of inner world.

I agree that they are individual souls even though they share memories, personalities and behaviours. It just becomes very confusing and chaotic when you try to define constance within the story. Like the Gally that woke up with the Imaginos body in LO Vol 1 is not the same soul as the one in Gunnm series, but she believes she is the same person and that is important to the story isn't it? Can a dead soul flow back from heaven unchanged? Can you pour the water in a cup into an ocean and refill it with the exact same water?

However only creatures with a living brains can be defined as "homo sapiens" - Tipherians and androids are not biological humans - rather an artificial humans.

It's easier to see how Androids with brainchips are artificial humans, but I'd say Tiphareans are a bit harder to define. At first I was thinking they were cyborgs except they swapped their brain instead of their body parts, but if the soul resides in the brain then their souls left with their brain and they have new souls with original biology so "artifical human" doesn't quite work for me. Makes you wonder if the mayhem that followed the revelation of the secret would have even occurred. They could have just as easily been chill about it, but I guess the fact they went nuts shows the unimportance of appearance.

Death is the end of an existance. If you erase the robot's memory and reinstall their OS they will die. Because the container of their soul is an information within. You cannot reinstall or delete the human brain, so the information and biological brain are individible.
I cannot yet define when robot will die in my theory. It could be that they're dying every time you shut them down (humans cannot be shutted down).

There's figurative death and then there's practical death. A computer restarting could be seen as dying and starting a brand new life, but you could equate that to a human going to sleep and waking up again. Continuity of consciousness has been broken in both cases, but practical death hasn't occurred in either. A human can shut down completely and be considered dead, but then be revived again medically. Are these cases where the soul has left the body, only to return in tact? Or have they been replaced by a new soul, but one that's practically indistinguishable from the previous one?

and robots dream of electrical sheeps

That's another thing. Humans have subconsciousness. Will AI be able to dream when they go to sleep?

[hepar]

A human can shut down completely and be considered dead, but then be revived again medically. Are these cases where the soul has left the body, only to return in tact? Or have they been replaced by a new soul, but one that's practically indistinguishable from the previous one?

Body is slowly dying for hous and days after the heart stopped. And also brain cannot be shutted down, because that would mean closing all synapses and stopping every impulse. Of course brain will never be alive again after that.

[MugattuHasGotchu]

Ok I just read up on actual brain death and yes that means real death of the consciousness.

However what about stasis? It's not been proven if revival after suspended animation is possible, but this is pretty much what happened to Gally. Would that be the same as brain death? Would some activity still be going on somehow? Is it possible to pause the brain and resume it later on as if it had never stopped?

[Dream]

well, stasis, as it works in science fiction, does perfectly stop the brain and reanimate it latter with no consequences. And it's generally isn't considered dead or alive during a stasis, it's usually just "stasis state".
For a more realistic point of view, I'd says it's like those frogs who can be frozen solid, and then thawed with no damages. The frozen brain is totally in a stasis state.

As for the all the "soul" debate. well. lol. As an atheist, I don't believe in this kind of stuff...

[MugattuHasGotchu]

I don't see how stasis would maintain vectors for all the particles and charges within not only the brain, but the rest of the body after coming out of suspended animation. Wouldn't everything be neutral and not know where to go on resume?

Also the frog can't really tell us if it's mind has remained intact so we can't use it to relate to humans. It is interesting that everything is able to function normally afterwards though.

As for being atheist, I guess you would agree that any idea of afterlife is just our survival mechanism compensating for the unfathomable? But how did it all begin? Every single argument I've ever seen from atheists still leads back to something that started it all. Check out the video I linked above.

[tcd]

Well, I'm fundamentally a practical buddhist.

I do believe in karma. I do believe that our fundamental cores come from the infinite sea of "buddhisness" that includes our universe and will come back to it after the death of our bodies.

I could accept as a token of faith the possibility of reincarnation.
But I prefer to say that, since we don't yet know anything about what happens before birth and after death, it is much better to make the best out of the life we're currently living now.

For what concerns GLO, I believe that Sechs, Elf and Zwolf, though being brainchip replicas from Gally's past as a Tuned, have "inherited" her stream of consciousness from that specific time-point and then, through their own personal experiences, remodeled and reshaped themselves into becoming different beings. If you'd ask me, I'd tell you that they're not "copies" anymore, but have become Gally's brothers/sisters (or cousins?).

Sechs is for sure Gally's brother, IMHO. Their first turbulent encounter, on Tiphares, totally felt like a brother being jealous of his older sibling. LOL.

Those airheads (elf & zwolf) look more like cousins.

For what concerns Data, I don't believe that emotions are to be an essential part of someone's self-awareness or someone's sentience.

I think that, technically speaking, one could talk about sentience and self-awareness when the being in exam is asking questions about its own consciousness and individuality and can also use meta-thoughts to inquire about its own thought processes.

I've now realized that what I've just written makes me feel like I haven't yet left my workplace to go back home. Ew. I'll follow this discussion another time

See ya.

Which version of Blade Runner should I buy on DVD? the original one or the revised one? Or both?

One thing I'm sure of: I do not want to fall in the trap of wasting my time looking in the DVDs for that stupid white unicorn I remember from seeing it at the cinema when I was a child.

[Narushima]

Because I'm new, and i hate reading blocks of text, i think the first brain was soaked in something other than "brain juice".. i think it was some liquid polymer that hardened on impact. Anyways, Hi, I'm new =]

[Dream]

I don't see how stasis would maintain vectors for all the particles and charges within not only the brain, but the rest of the body after coming out of suspended animation. Wouldn't everything be neutral and not know where to go on resume?

That's not how brains works. The electricity in the brain isn't really important. The data is mostly stored in the way neurons are connected together. As long as the stasis doesn't destroy that, there's no reason that it would damage the brain functionalities. There's no reason the "reboot" would be harmfull or traumatizing, especially since the brain is usually sleeping during the whole thing.

Talking about the video.... how to says it ... I found it annoying from the very beginning. I gave it a try for a couple of minute, until the guy start to go "what if there was a will behind the universe". Sounded like one of those pro-intelligent design propaganda. Couldn't stand more.

[MugattuHasGotchu]

For what concerns Data, I don't believe that emotions are to be an essential part

In the question "what makes us human?" I think emotion plays a huge factor in how we relate to and interpret the world. Data not having emotions may still qualify him as self-aware and deserving of rights, but his experience is colourless compared to that of a human's. I think emotions have to be included in the concept of soul, just as much as consciousness, and even moreso than intelligence. It's through emotions that we can even discern purpose. If Data didn't have human behaviour to model his own behaviour on, I doubt he'd do anything but sit there calculating the endless possibilities of everything around him, but not actually deciding on a course of action.

the first brain was soaked in something other than "brain juice"

i guess that could mean it's original, but how you go about a brain-juice transfusion is beyond my feeble intellect. and greetings to the new member!

since the brain is usually sleeping during the whole thing

ok mind being based on configuration i get, but what does that part mean? how is the brain sleeping if it's completely suspended, ie zero activity? am i understanding the concepts of stasis and sleep incorrectly? is sleep mode not merely a passive resting mode, but an actual cessation of brain activity?

as for the video it is a bit on the infotainment side, but there is by no means any endorsement of the idiotic brand of intelligent design that takes the bible literally or anything. there are some very interesting ideas such as how complexity can be achieved from incredibly simple parameters, how artificial intelligence would affect our world, and how transhumanism might be the natural successor to evolution. it does delve into unobservable topics like multiverses, what lies beyond our universe, and the nature of reality, but it does so quite thoughtfully. i guess to enjoy it however you'll have to set aside your atheistic certainties for an hour to entertain other possibilities.

[CharyOdd]

Well, I'm fundamentally a practical buddhist.
Which version of Blade Runner should I buy on DVD? the original one or the revised one? Or both?

One thing I'm sure of: I do not want to fall in the trap of wasting my time looking in the DVDs for that stupid white unicorn I remember from seeing it at the cinema when I was a child.

Buy Ghost in The Shell: Stand Alone Compleks.. there are about 25 episodes .. in which EXACTLY same problem is described.. Also in manga GiTS there is described technology which dubs "ghosts".. In that world AI still hasn't developed to point where it can be stated as "being with Ghost"..

In vol 10 of LO and in vol 9 of normal series .. Yukito said with Gallys aparence that "Human is Human".. it doesn't make any diffrence if it is artificialy made or natural born or have brain or not..

But you see i would not consider Sechs being human.. in chapter when he is first time fighting Zekka he says that he is battle android. So he dont distinguish himself with human kind.. rather he is a human-made-killing-tool
Hall and all Terminators also aren't humans becuse they dont even try to define them selfs as human beings.. They are just tools.. THEY DEFINITLY are some kind of being but human concept for me would have to wait for them... in GiTS: Stand Alone Compleks .. in one of episodes there is discusion between Fuchikomas if they are humans .. and also in second series of anime there are more compleks discusion about having a Ghost..

To karma.. im catolic.. so for me karma doesnt mean fate.. It means in my reasoning a term that describes whole things that you made in life and their impact on your present decision.. so to conquer Karma in "Novas meaning" is to be not restricted by things that you archived and have free will of choice.. this concept is fairly universal to me

and for last ... concept of robots going to heaven.. i think not ... everything that is writen in AI is just reflection of humans.. Good example is when Ping lerned robots to gamble..

On other hand if we as humans are also lerned about heaven and other life, we should also be not able to go to heaven.. BUT we BELIVE in it and i think that is diffrence betwen goin to heaven by robots and humans.. and also Robot can become human being i think when he will gain some karmic potential in "Novas concept".. so who know.

[Narushima]

I BELIEVE YOU ALL NEED TO WATCH

BICENTENNIAL MAN

But that only addresses the fact that robots can become humans and such...
on the brain thing, i'll have to read your BLOCKS of text and come back to you guys