If a super-super-duper machine was able to scan the exact physical state of your entire brain and were to recreate your brain exactly as it is in another body would there then be two of “you”? Where would “you” be?
Imagine a super-duper clever machine that can work its way through your brain and, one cell at a time, remove a cell and create a new cell in its place that is physically identical in every way. I know that the brain has a lot of cells but let’s say one cell is replaced every hour and time isn’t an issue (this is, after all, a thought experiment).
When the machine was finished, what would you experience? That you are still there or that you have gradually died?
Or would there be a crucial part of the brain in which you cannot swap even a single cell without destroying what is “you”? If so, where might this be? And would this be remedied by replacing atom-by-atom?
If you were to undergo surgery that swapped your brain with someone else’s, what would you experience after the operation?
In 1973 the BBC released a TV documentary series in 13 episodes by mathematician Jacob Bronowski called The Ascent Of Man. 35 years later I purchased it as a DVD box set on the recommendation of a fellow science documentary aficionado.
It’s extremely good! And I’m not just saying that in the context of the era in which it was produced. Sure, some of the music grates on the nerves and some of the graphics don’t compare to what we are capable of these days but overall it’s got a depth that is often missing from the kind of documentaries found on the Discovery Channel. Actually, I take back my comment about the music; it features music from Meddle - my second-favourite Pink Floyd album - which, for me, redeems a multitude of musical sins.
Bronowski is thoughtful, poetic and very deliberate in every sentence. He gives you the feeling that he is treating you, the viewer, as an equal throughout and he conveys a sense of awe that is impossible to resist.
Most moving for me was a scene where Bronowski is visiting a Nazi concentration camp where many of his relatives were murdered. According to the interview with Attenborough in the bonus material the entire scene was spontaneous and filmed in a single take:
Bronowski died a year later of a heart attack at the age of 66.
A while back there was a furore about a guy who walked out of a Catholic mass with an uneaten cracker. For the uninitiated, Catholics believe in a thing called “transubstantiation” which is the belief that a wafer of bread literally turns into the flesh of a guy called Jesus who died 2000 years ago. As part of this ritual they eat what they believe to be, literally, the flesh of Jesus. Bizarre, I know but there are over one billion people who think this is rather neat.
Anyway, many Catholics got very upset that this person had - to their minds - taken their God hostage. He was accused of committing a hate crime along with kidnapping and he even received death threats.
A bemused science blogger called PZ Myers wrote an article about it entitled It’s a Fracken’ Cracker and in it (along with expressing his astonishment that seemingly rational people could threaten the life of a person over the incorrect ritual use of a cracker) he said he’d be more than happy to desecrate one to show the absurdity of the situation.
The Catholic community quickly rounded on Myers and targeted him with threats among other things.
Myers has finally put the whole thing to bed in an article today entitled The Great Desecration. Within four hours of the article being posted it had attracted over 1000 comments. I’m reproducing it in its entirity below for posterity and because I think it’s important that issues like this be brought to light when they arise.
No matter what your beliefs it should be fairly simple to understand that the theft or desecration of a cracker (which was actually given to the guy in the first place) does not justify personal threats to a person’s well-being.
I’m not sure whether this experiment has been done before but I was watching some videos on YouTube and noticed that with some speakers/shouters my heart rate seemed to increase. I’m not sure whether this is because I agree or disagree strongly with what they are saying or whether it is some kind of natural human response to emotion or a particular pitch in voices (sort of like the urge to cry when seeing someone else cry or laugh when you hear laughter).
An interesting experiment would be to play a series of audio clips of various speakers to people whilst monitoring their heart rates. It would be handy to have them also rate the clips on how strongly they agree or disagree with the speaker.
Once the results were in I then wonder if you could use software to analyse the audio and make predictions as to how strongly a person is likely to respond on an emotional level to a particular style of speech.
I’ve heard that Pinker is considering putting pen to paper to more fully address the issue of the history of violence. If it’s as thorough as his excellent The Blank Slate then I look forward to seeing a detailed presentation of the facts to support the claims he puts forward in this video.
In celebration of the World Youth Day in Sydney and of the recent “Academic Freedom” law changes in Louisiana I’d like to present Galileo Galilei’s confession for the “absurd and philosophically false” notion that “the earth is not the center of the world, nor immovable, but that it moves”:
I, Galileo Galilei, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei of Florence, aged 70 years, tried personally by this court, and kneeling before You, the most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors-General throughout the Christian Republic against heretical depravity, having before my eyes the Most Holy Gospels, and laying on them my own hands; I swear that I have always believed, I believe now, and with God’s help I will in future believe all which the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church doth hold, preach, and teach.
But since I, after having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the Sun was the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth was not the centre of the same and that it moved, and that I was neither to hold, defend, nor teach in any manner whatever, either orally or in writing, the said false doctrine; and after having received a notification that the said doctrine is contrary to Holy Writ, I did write and cause to be printed a book in which I treat of the said already condemned doctrine, and bring forward arguments of much efficacy in its favour, without arriving at any solution: I have been judged vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having held and believed that the Sun is the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth is not the centre of the same, and that it does move.
Nevertheless, wishing to remove from the minds of your Eminences and all faithful Christians this vehement suspicion reasonably conceived against me, I abjure with sincere heart and unfeigned faith, I curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and generally all and every error and sect contrary to the Holy Catholic Church. And I swear that for the future I will neither say nor assert in speaking or writing such things as may bring upon me similar suspicion; and if I know any heretic, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this Holy Office, or to the Inquisitor and Ordinary of the place in which I may be.
I also swear and promise to adopt and observe entirely all the penances which have been or may be by this Holy Office imposed on me. And if I contravene any of these said promises, protests, or oaths, (which God forbid!) I submit myself to all the pains and penalties which by the Sacred Canons and other Decrees general and particular are against such offenders imposed and promulgated. So help me God and the Holy Gospels, which I touch with my own hands.
I Galileo Galilei aforesaid have abjured, sworn, and promised, and hold myself bound as above; and in token of the truth, with my own hand have subscribed the present schedule of my abjuration, and have recited it word by word. In Rome, at the Convent della Minerva, this 22nd day of June, 1633.
I, GALILEO GALILEI, have abjured as above, with my own hand.
Today I managed to see The King of Kong which was showing as part of the film festival.
Best. Film. Ever. Sorry, the most entertaining film I’ve seen in a long time (it must have been the endorphins talking with that original statement).
You probably have to have seen it to understand but today was the last showing so keep an eye out for it if it ever makes it to other cinemas or your local video shop.
