Are these Ghosts or Just my Imagination?

[AppleQueso]

I'm just saying it would be a copy your yourself, not yourself in actuality. It's not like you personally would be able to experience the same things that your copied, computerized self would experience.

I think you might be overcomplicating my comment.

Inazuma said it earlier: we are our brains. If a copy of my brain was made and digitized into a computer, and that digitized version was implanted into a new body, that new body still wouldn't be me. It would be a copy of me.

[Limewater]

I'm trying to give you the benefit of a doubt, but it looks like you're hinting at dualism here. Not to go too far into it, but that's not an idea that's entertained by any cognitive scientist, neuroscientist, AI researcher, or honestly anyone who thinks a bit about the implications of basic physics (F=ma, conservation of energy, etc). It was a nice idea for Decartes' time, but it belongs in the 17th century, just like geocentrism, or Lamarckism.

I'm not sure I can agree with this statement. I only know one guy in cognitive science, and I don't know his current position on the idea (I think it may have changed in the past five years or so), and I don't know any neuroscientists, but I have personally known multiple AI researchers and physicists, et cetera, who believe in some form of dualism.

[Hatta]

I'm just saying it would be a copy your yourself, not yourself in actuality. It's not like you personally would be able to experience the same things that your copied, computerized self would experience.

I suppose you're sort of right then. It wouldn't be the same you, but it would be a you.

I'm not sure I can agree with this statement. I only know one guy in cognitive science, and I don't know his current position on the idea (I think it may have changed in the past five years or so), and I don't know any neuroscientists, but I have personally known multiple AI researchers and physicists, et cetera, who believe in some form of dualism.

An AI researcher who believes in dualism is like a biologist who believes in creationism. They might hold it as a personal belief, but no one is seriously arguing for the idea in the literature.

[Limewater]

An AI researcher who believes in dualism is like a biologist who believes in creationism. They might hold it as a personal belief, but no one is seriously arguing for the idea in the literature.

I'm not even sure that such a question would reasonably come up in AI research. I'm certainly not up to date in the field, and never have been, and I don't know all of the ins and outs of it, but I did do an internship in an AI lab during my undergrad years, and have taken a (terrible) graduate-level class in it. Nothing in my reading at the time (associative memories, ANFIS, self-organizing maps, neural nets and a bunch of crap I've forgotten about) ever came close to that domain. That sounds more like a philosophy question or something, if that (I'm no philosopher).

[Gamerforlife]

Always so amusing to me how people think that science has all the answers when science is still discovering new things every day, including finding old theories to be incorrect

It's just my opinion, but we are NOT our brains. Of course I'm hinting at consciousness or what some people would call a "soul". Maybe science will be able to copy us some day, but there will always be something very "off" about that copied brain or copied individual. The information may be there, but the person isn't

[Frizz.Meister]

For hundreds of years people said the Giant Squid was just a tale told by drunken sailors.

In the early 19th century people in North America said the Aligator Gar was a urban myth.

The Mekong catfish was a creature which only a few villages in tailand actually believed in untill 1970.

In 1998 a new creature known locally as the Giant Water Dragon was officially recorded to be a new species of Giant Salamander.

The duck billed platypus upon discovery in australia was not recognised as more than a legend untill a specimen was brought before a live audience.

I dont believe in ghosts and find the idea somewhat rediculous. But this is one crazy world so alot of "paranormal"(horrid phrase) things i often reckon are exagerations of things we simply dont know to much about yet. Plus mystery makes the world way more fun

[darthmunky]

Ghosts DO exist. Not believing in ghosts is like not believing in aliens which is outrageously stupid, lol. But no, I do not think those are photos of ghosts. 99% of the time, "orbs" are just dust particles or bugs, the light shines off of them creating what looks like an "orb".

[Hobie-wan]

I'm very disappointed in the amount of superstitious belief in this thread. *sigh*

[Limewater]

I'm very disappointed in the amount of superstitious belief in this thread. *sigh*

What's so disappointing?

I don't really believe that ghosts walk the earth, but, particularly if someone believes he has had direct experience with them, I don't really see how such a belief is unreasonable.

[dsheinem]

Ghosts DO exist. Not believing in ghosts is like not believing in aliens which is outrageously stupid, lol.

Stupid? Why?

Science tells us there are good odds that life exists on other planets. It does not tell us there are good odds ghosts are real.