Hoping To ‘Eliminate Death’ By 2045

[wily me]

Hoping To ‘Eliminate Death’ By 2045, Working On Humanoid Robot Avatars

[video=youtube;01hbkh4hXEk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01hbkh4hXEk&feature=player_embedded[/video]

It is estimated that a total of 55.3 million people die each year, equivalent to almost 2 every single second. Death is a fact of life, or so we thought. A project by the name of Russia 2045 is ambitiously attempting to conquer immortality in as little as 33 years by way of creating humanoid robots that have human personalities stored on artificial brains.

The whole project seems crazily ambitious, insomuch that the social initiative – which is founded and led by Russian media billionaire Dmitry Itskov – is driven by the ideological belief that immortality is within our grasp and that by 2045, artificial bodies will surpass existing human bodies in terms of functionality and “will achieve perfection of form”. The ‘Manifesto of the “Russia 2045” Strategic Social Movement’ also indicates the possibility of such avatars acting as an “extension of [people’s] lives…after the resources of the biological body have been exhausted.”

More: http://newrisingmedia.com/all/2012/...o-eliminate-death-by-2045-working-on-hum.html

Not sure where this topic belongs? Let's hope!

 

[boramk]

Well you wouldn't be immortal would you? You'd be a hologram so in essence it would be a copy of you. You still die..

 

[Maddmatt]

Well you wouldn't be immortal would you? You'd be a hologram so in essence it would be a copy of you. You still die..

Yup. Even if you could copy the brain, you still need a way to transfer the 'soul' (and figure out what that even is).

 

[Randux]

Will you wake up in this robotic body? No! So What's the point you still dead?

 

[Elimentals]

Yup. Even if you could copy the brain, you still need a way to transfer the 'soul' (and figure out what that even is).

Hahahaha, he made a funny.

But in essence I get it, its the same argument I have against teleportation. if you "copy" yourself is it still in essence you or did you not create a new you and the old one still dies. So you can say your knowledge was preserved but inside a new being with its own sense of self.

Anyway I think this type of debate is best left to PD as it has nothing to do with science.

 

[DJ...]

Yup. Even if you could copy the brain, you still need a way to transfer the 'soul' (and figure out what that even is).

Let's keep the religious nonsense out of this thread. Unless of course you have some insight into the soul that relates directly to this? As in evidence of soul transfer in clones, perhaps?

 

[Techne]

Hoping To ‘Eliminate Death’ By 2045, Working On Humanoid Robot Avatars

[video=youtube;01hbkh4hXEk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01hbkh4hXEk&feature=player_embedded[/video]



More: http://newrisingmedia.com/all/2012/...o-eliminate-death-by-2045-working-on-hum.html

Not sure where this topic belongs? Let's hope!

For this research to succeed, some form of the computational theory of the mind would have to be true. This is a metaphysical thesis. There are good, logical reasons to reject this thesis. Part of the issue lies with what it means to be "you" or have a "self" and another is intentionality. Also, we don't even know what consciousness is and whether quantum mechanics is relevant. But these guys have faith in their project, good luck to them!

 

[boramk]

I wonder if an Avatar me would be depressed I was an Avatar..

 

[Maddmatt]

Let's keep the religious nonsense out of this thread.

It wasn't meant in a religious sense, I'm Atheist FFS.

I'm talking about transferring you, the actual person, you're life or whatever, into another body. I'm not sure of a better way to describe it as a 'soul'. Otherwise you still die and an artificial clone is made in your place, which is utterly useless for the purpose of living longer.

Unless of course you have some insight into the soul that relates directly to this? As in evidence of soul transfer in clones, perhaps?

Notice the part in brackets "and figure out what that even is", which is me acknowledging the lack of insight

Did you put in more than 2 seconds of thought before you decided to be a rude smarta**?

 

[Elimentals]

Relevant:

[video=youtube;IFe9wiDfb0E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E[/video]

 

[Techne]

It wasn't meant in a religious sense, I'm Atheist FFS.

I'm talking about transferring you, the actual person, you're life or whatever, into another body. I'm not sure of a better way to describe it as a 'soul'. Otherwise you still die and an artificial clone is made in your place, which is utterly useless for the purpose of living longer.



Notice the part in brackets "and figure out what that even is", which is me acknowledging the lack of insight

Did you put in more than 2 seconds of thought before you decided to be a rude smarta**?

You don't have to be religious to believe you have a soul. Besides, there are various views on what exactly the soul is (e.g. Aristotelian and Cartesian) and it has nothing to do with religion. The concept of the soul depends on various metaphysical views just like the topic raised in the OP.

 

[AntiThesis]

Let's keep the religious nonsense out of this thread. Unless of course you have some insight into the soul that relates directly to this? As in evidence of soul transfer in clones, perhaps?

Whether you feel it's "religious nonsense" or not, it'll still be a concern for quite a number of people. There's no need to get nasty about it right off the bat. Regardless, essentially the same problem as transferring consciousness really - how do you ensure that whatever it is is kept intact?

I suppose you could just try it out on some folks and see what happens

I wonder if an Avatar me would be depressed I was an Avatar..

Depends - if you get to ride those awesome bird monsters, I'd be pretty happy.

 

[DJ...]

There is simply no evidence for the existence of the soul. To claim that we need some way to transfer it is just ridiculous and from my experience is steeped in either religious or new-age hocus pocus bull. While it may be a concern for some, it certainly isn't anything scientists should be addressing, which is essentially what the poster was saying.

It wasn't meant in a religious sense, I'm Atheist FFS.

I'm talking about transferring you, the actual person, you're life or whatever, into another body. I'm not sure of a better way to describe it as a 'soul'.

The actual person resides in the brain. No amount of evidence points to the contrary so perhaps you're still not making yourself clear...?

Otherwise you still die and an artificial clone is made in your place, which is utterly useless for the purpose of living longer.

Yip, you're either referring to a religious soul, or a new-age hippie soul. Sorry but no evidence exists for it so scientists really shouldn't be spending time researching it. My blunt reply was deserved...

 

[TJ99]

1. I wouldn't believe anything Russian science says these days, after I read that article about how Glorious God-emperor Putin is developing weapons that defy the laws of physics.

2. If it does turn out to be possible, they also need to discover a cure for breeding or we will have a massive problem.

 

[Techne]

There is simply no evidence for the existence of the soul.

This is just an ignorant statement. The soul is NOT an empirical issue, it is a philosophical issue. You can't make that silly claim if you don't even have a coherent definition of what exactly a soul is.

To claim that we need some way to transfer it is just ridiculous and from my experience is steeped in either religious or new-age hocus pocus bull. While it may be a concern for some, it certainly isn't anything scientists should be addressing, which is essentially what the poster was saying.

Well, the person would be right, the soul is not something that can be addressed with empirical science, that is why informed and intellectually honest scientists won't make the silly claim that "there is no evidence for the soul".

The actual person resides in the brain. No amount of evidence points to the contrary so perhaps you're still not making yourself clear...?

It is not entirely clear what exactly you mean in the bolded part. Other people view a person as a whole, complete substance and not something that "resides in the brain", whatever that is supposed to mean.

Yip, you're either referring to a religious soul, or a new-age hippie soul. Sorry but no evidence exists for it so scientists really shouldn't be spending time researching it. My blunt reply was deserved...

May I suggest you read up on philosophical views of the soul such as the Cartesian view of the soul as well as the Aristotelian view of the soul. There is no need to confuse these views with religious views or new-agey hocus-pocus. These issues can be discussed WITHOUT dragging religion into it.

 

[Maddmatt]

There is simply no evidence for the existence of the soul. To claim that we need some way to transfer it is just ridiculous and from my experience is steeped in either religious or new-age hocus pocus bull. While it may be a concern for some, it certainly isn't anything scientists should be addressing, which is essentially what the poster was saying.

Maybe you're some kind of non-living robot then
Cloning does not equal immortality and the fact that a clone does not require the death of it's original counterpart to live proves this.

My blunt reply was deserved...

Ah, so a perfectly friendly post deserves rudeness by your logic. Shows what kind of person you are, a sad pathetic douchebag.

 

[Techne]

Maybe you're some kind of non-living robot then
Cloning does not equal immortality and the fact that a clone does not require the death of it's original counterpart to live proves this.



Ah, so a perfectly friendly post deserves rudeness by your logic. Shows what kind of person you are, a sad pathetic douchebag.

Sheesh dude, if this is the kind of reaction the chap is getting out of you, rather ignore him and move along. No need to be rude to rude people. The best thing you can do is just ignore, don't get dragged down to other people's level of discourse.

 

[AntiThesis]

Oi, offsides - please don't insult people Just because you don't agree with him, doesn't make him a douchebag.

Anyway, to drag this kicking and screaming back on some kind of track - the use of Avatar A seems more like "I sit at home and chill while a robot does my bidding" and the use of Avatar B seems to assume that there's been no degradation of the brain that is transplanted. Surely if I have Alzheimer's and then get transplanted, I'll just be a robot with Alzheimer's?

 

[DJ...]

To avoid derailing this thread further I will butt out of the soul debate. I find it a pathetic one to have. Techne, if you want, you are welcome to rehash all the old arguments in all of the countless previous threads where you carry on and on about how the soul is philosophical in nature, but somehow plays a role in reality...:erm:

 

[Techne]

To avoid derailing this thread further I will butt out of the soul debate. I find it a pathetic one to have. Techne, if you want, you are welcome to rehash all the old arguments in all of the countless previous threads where you carry on and on about how the soul is philosophical in nature, but somehow plays a role in reality...:erm:

"philosophical in nature"? Don't really know what you mean by this. Anyway, have fun.