Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 201 posts

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#11

Post by JProthero »

yellow_lead wrote: post #6

Aside from the moral aspects, it's also interesting to think about the results. Would a new brain have difficulty operating a different body? Would one's senses translate similarly? Would the person's idea of where their limbs are in space be all messed up?

Perhaps the results of hand transplantation procedures, which have already been carried out successfully [1], could provide some insight into this question.

The functionality that hand transplant recipients obtain from the transplant apparently varies, but the results can be quite impressive. The Wikipedia article notes one recipient was able to use his transplanted hand to drink from a bottle of water a week after the procedure, and tie shoelaces after a few months.

If brains can successfully adapt to controlling a transplanted hand, under the right circumstances perhaps they can also adapt to multiple transplanted limbs, or a whole body.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_transplant#Long-term_func...

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#12

Post by Blikkentrekker »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #8
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find there to be nothing interesting about it. This, like so many other “philosophical quæstions” is a futile quibble of semantics that answers nothing. The simple answer to this problem, and many other problems, is that the exercise of giving clouds of atoms in vicinity to one another “identities” is not one based in salient thought. — there is no such thing. All Theseus' Ship shows is that, indeed, this theory is…

> The simple answer to this problem, and many other problems, is that the exercise of giving clouds of atoms in vicinity to one another “identities” is not one based in salient thought. — there is no such thing. Are you implying identies don't exist? Because that either has to be sophistry (i.e. trolling) or insanity.

“exist"? I would hardly use such words in this frame of reference.

I'm saying that “identities” are a fuzzy human “You know it when you see it, and different men see it differently.” category that is bereft of any definition that can be objectively measured and reasoned about, and that what I just said is a trivial and obvious conclusion.

They “exist” in the same way that borders between different oceans exist, arbitrarily drawn, and different people will think differently as to where they lie.

If you wish to call that an “existence”, then be my guest, though many others would præfer to not call it such. — ironically the border between “existence” and “nonexistence” is of a similar quality.

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#13

Post by LeoPanthera »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #7
userbinator wrote: post #2

Ethical and moral considerations aside, this also has some interesting philsophical implications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

A colleague went on once about Star Trek transporters: what if they worked by "scanning" a person, sent that data over the airwaves, then, made a perfect copy of somewhere else (sourcing new molecules from wherever) — would this copy believe they were the original? He went on: suppose you kill the original — did you "transport" the person? Star Trek creeps me out a little now.

This actually happens in the TNG episode "Second Chances", in which Riker is unknowingly duplicated.

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#14

Post by keiferski »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #12
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple answer to this problem, and many other problems, is that the exercise of giving clouds of atoms in vicinity to one another “identities” is not one based in salient thought. — there is no such thing. Are you implying identies don't exist? Because that either has to be sophistry (i.e. trolling) or insanity.

“exist"? I would hardly use such words in this frame of reference. I'm saying that “identities” are a fuzzy human “ You know it when you see it, and different men see it differently. ” category that is bereft of any definition that can be objectively measured and reasoned about, and that what I just said is a trivial and obvious conclusion. They “exist” in the same way that borders between different oceans exist, arb…

The fact that borders exist doesn’t imply that there are different centers of power. In fact, for most of history borders were notoriously ill-defined.

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#15

Post by jhanschoo »

XorNot wrote: post #5
userbinator wrote: post #2

Ethical and moral considerations aside, this also has some interesting philsophical implications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

It doesn't really raise any interesting philosophical questions though: so long as we're moving at least an intact brain from body to body, nothing dramatic has really happened (and all the small stuff applies up and down the stack - you go under aneasthesia, we put a new part in, you wake up and get all sorts of different signalling from this part which is not genetically yours.

I don't think this is as interesting philosophically as people who have half brains removed, but note that a head transplant is more invasive than what you and the article acknowledge: the CNS is partly in the body, and the body regulates one's hormonal makeup which is in itself pretty complex and tied to one's sapience.

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#16

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #12
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple answer to this problem, and many other problems, is that the exercise of giving clouds of atoms in vicinity to one another “identities” is not one based in salient thought. — there is no such thing. Are you implying identies don't exist? Because that either has to be sophistry (i.e. trolling) or insanity.

“exist"? I would hardly use such words in this frame of reference. I'm saying that “identities” are a fuzzy human “ You know it when you see it, and different men see it differently. ” category that is bereft of any definition that can be objectively measured and reasoned about, and that what I just said is a trivial and obvious conclusion. They “exist” in the same way that borders between different oceans exist, arb…

> I'm saying that “identities” are a fuzzy human “You know it when you see it, and different men see it differently.”

I.e., you claim that identities don't (really) exist.

Do triangles exist? Is the definition of triangle "bereft of any definition that can be objectively measured"?

Is the Ship of Theseus fundamentally different than a triangle, or is it merely a difference of degree?

Ask any random human to define some extremely complex mathematical entity, and you'll get various fuzzy answers.

Does that mean complex math doesn't really exist?

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#17

Post by Larrikin »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #7
userbinator wrote: post #2

Ethical and moral considerations aside, this also has some interesting philsophical implications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

A colleague went on once about Star Trek transporters: what if they worked by "scanning" a person, sent that data over the airwaves, then, made a perfect copy of somewhere else (sourcing new molecules from wherever) — would this copy believe they were the original? He went on: suppose you kill the original — did you "transport" the person? Star Trek creeps me out a little now.

I always imagine this will be the divide between rich and poor in the future. The more expensive technology will break the person down and send their atoms to the destination to be reconstructed, it will be slower but it will be the same person. The less expensive technology will scan the person send that data and they will be printed out from a a futuristic atomic printer in a process that kills the original.

I imagine a mining colony around the asteroid belt where the CEO uses the more expensive tech that is slower to visit every so often but the workers are forced to use the tech that kills them everyday but they are just a light beam of zero and ones on their "commute"

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#18

Post by JProthero »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #7
userbinator wrote: post #2

Ethical and moral considerations aside, this also has some interesting philsophical implications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

A colleague went on once about Star Trek transporters: what if they worked by "scanning" a person, sent that data over the airwaves, then, made a perfect copy of somewhere else (sourcing new molecules from wherever) — would this copy believe they were the original? He went on: suppose you kill the original — did you "transport" the person? Star Trek creeps me out a little now.

There is a long tradition in academic philosophy of using this model of teleportation as a device for investigating questions of personal identity. Derek Parfit's 'Reasons and Persons' is probably the best-known treatment [1].

I think there are good reasons to believe this is not generally how the writers of Star Trek thought the transporters in their stories were supposed to work, but they weren't always perfectly consistent on the subject.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasons_and_persons#Personal_i...

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#19

Post by kevinmchugh »

yellow_lead wrote: post #6

Aside from the moral aspects, it's also interesting to think about the results. Would a new brain have difficulty operating a different body? Would one's senses translate similarly? Would the person's idea of where their limbs are in space be all messed up?

I think there would have to be a long, difficult adjustment period. Phantom limb syndrome is thought to be caused by the brain adapting to different/fewer signals from the missing limb. Covid-19 parosmia may be caused by the regrowing sustentacular cells. The physical interfaces between our brains and our inputs and outputs are very delicate

Re: Transplant an organ? Why not an entire body?

#20

Post by dehrmann »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #7
userbinator wrote: post #2

Ethical and moral considerations aside, this also has some interesting philsophical implications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

A colleague went on once about Star Trek transporters: what if they worked by "scanning" a person, sent that data over the airwaves, then, made a perfect copy of somewhere else (sourcing new molecules from wherever) — would this copy believe they were the original? He went on: suppose you kill the original — did you "transport" the person? Star Trek creeps me out a little now.

Did they just watch "The Prestige?"
Post reply on HN