Consciousness - The 6th Day (2000) Discussion

[–] conker_a 13 years ago

Nope, but it would still carry on with your legacy. That's the whole premise.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 8 years ago

I think it's kinda like imdb board and moviechat.org

Moviechat has all the imdb old board memories and can be said as a ressurection of the old board. When the original board closes, moviechat feels like it prolongs the life.

If someday moviechat closes down and there's another clone board that has all the archives from old imdb board and moviechat as well, then it can be said somehow, in a way, that the imdb board is immortal.

reply

[–] agenericperson 13 years ago

they do address it. they dont dwell on it needlessly (since this is more of an action scifi film). theres even one scene where Drucker is face to face with his own clone. his clone makes him take his clothes off while he is dying. Drucker is horrified by this. the clone says something like, "its what youd do, isnt it?" Drucker reluctantly agrees and gives up his clothes. the idea is if you cant live forever, the best you can do is make sure someone just like you does.

they are different people for all extensive purposes. but they are also the same (same memories, same body). i think when you say "self" you actually mean "soul." there is no known scientific basis for the soul. there very likely isnt a soul. in the film, they transfer all information from your brain. like it or not, that is your self. the clone and the original have the same self up till the point where the memories diverge. that is where the selves become separate. this doesnt really need explaining because it obvious. this is the difference between the two people. theres no a soul or as you said "self" that separates the two. the only difference is the separate bodies at separates times lead to separate experiences. this creates a divergence in their selves. this is why the original Arnold bought the repet and the clone didnt.

reply

[–] FlyingPie 13 years ago

i think when you say "self" you actually mean "soul." there is no known scientific basis for the soul. there very likely isnt a soul. in the film, they transfer all information from your brain. like it or not, that is your self.

I intentionally avoided the word "soul" in my post because I myself am skeptical about the existence of a soul. However, absence of proof does not prove that something doesn't exist. For example, there is still insufficient information to explain gravity, yet we know gravity exists. Perhaps that's not a perfect analogy, but it's the best I can think of right now.

To me it seems obvious that we have some sort of consciousness / point of view which is the reason why you are you and nobody else. As you mentioned in your reply, Drucker was alive to talk to his clone when his clone was taking his clothes. Obviously, Drucker and his clone were aware of themselves and speaking from their own point of view; they couldn't have been in both bodies at the same time. This is what I am talking about - and as you said, the idea is if you can't live forever, the best you can do is make sure someone just like you does.

the clone and the original have the same self up till the point where the memories diverge. that is where the selves become separate. this doesnt really need explaining because it obvious.

I wasn't arguing against that; in fact, that is what I saw the film trying to convey. Part of my point was that the movie seems to suggest that cloning would allow people to be immortal, when really it's not quite the case; it would just let you ensure that someone just like you stays around.

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply

[–] agenericperson 13 years ago

its left up to the viewer whether someone can be immortal. if there is no soul and you could reproduce perfect copies of the mind and body, immortality may be possible... sorta. there would be no difference but one would be a copy. this is sort of addressed by having two Arnolds at the same time (and two Druckers). but for the others things became a little less clear. the clone took over where the other left off. so in every essence that matters they are the same person.

now you said, the absence of evidence is no evidence of absence which i agree with. but its more complicated than that. if you would expect to find evidence and you dont, then theres reason to conclude what you are looking for might not exist. on the issue of the soul. if there is something interacting with our brains in a meaningful way, it would leave physical evidence. this is why a soul is unlikely. plus, we have learned a great deal about the brain over time. things like split brain and brain injuries show that pretty much everything that determines who we are resides in the brain. modifying the brain can completely change a person. if a soul exists, it would have little effect on who we are. and changing the brain itself complicates what a soul could even refer to.

i appreciate you avoiding using the word, but you are still describing it. youre just using more scientific words (though somewhat wrongly). for example, point of view would remain the same. if you replicate all the information in the brain, then the clone that would replace you would think the same thoughts as you. theyd see things the same way as you. theyd just take over where you left out.

to further complicate the issue of self, the human body replicates most of its cells over a given period. in some sense, you have taken over a body passed down to you from another version of yourself who has died. its the same philosophical issue. are you the same person as when you were born? its almost the same thing as is an exact copy of you still you? most likely there is no answer (well really the answer simply depends on how you define the self which is already an ambiguous term as is). ive also seen it mentioned in discussions about Star Trek which uses teleportation in its stories. is the person getting destroyed in the A end of the teleporter the same person who comes out of the B end? its questions like these that plague people (perhaps thats what you wanted more of). people dont like they idea that they may not be unique. its probably one reason human cloning has been outlawed. though thats really silly since real human cloning is nothing more than producing younger twins. copying all the active and inactive information on brain would be a logistical nightmare. it might not even possible. individuality will remain intact for the foreseeable future.

reply

[–] FlyingPie 13 years ago

plus, we have learned a great deal about the brain over time. things like split brain and brain injuries show that pretty much everything that determines who we are resides in the brain. modifying the brain can completely change a person. if a soul exists, it would have little effect on who we are. and changing the brain itself complicates what a soul could even refer to.

That's true. That is why I am skeptical of the existence of souls.

appreciate you avoiding using the word, but you are still describing it. youre just using more scientific words (though somewhat wrongly). for example, point of view would remain the same. if you replicate all the information in the brain, then the clone that would replace you would think the same thoughts as you. theyd see things the same way as you. theyd just take over where you left out.

I understand what you mean. Language can be imprecise though. Besides the words "soul" and "consciousness", I'm not sure what else can easily describe it - the mechanism that makes you you and not anyone else. Self-awareness perhaps. A more philosophical question is, why were you born you and not anyone else, and why at that particular point in history? Is it purely random chance?

ive also seen it mentioned in discussions about Star Trek which uses teleportation in its stories. is the person getting destroyed in the A end of the teleporter the same person who comes out of the B end?

I tend to avoid discussions of Star Trek's teleporters because I'm still not sure if they have explicitly described how the transporter works well enough to really debate it seriously. They do tell us that it physically breaks us down at the molecular level and puts us back together at another point, and I'm uncertain whether that amounts to destroying a person/object. So I just avoid the teleporter discussion altogether. :) But there is evidence for your argument in the Next Generation episode "Second Chances" where they discover that a transporter accident produced another copy of Riker. I also remember an instance when they wanted to save Picard because he had beamed himself into a nebula (under control of an alien) and the crew used a copy of his pattern stored in the buffer to beam him back on the ship - perhaps a copy of him?

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply

[–] vmelkon 12 years ago

I think they are copying everything that is in the person's brain. If they just copied memory, the clone would not function at all. It would have a lot of missing parts in its neural network. It needs to be a total copy. Your clone will think he is you and will have the same thought patterns as you.

Your "self" is essentially circuits of neurons. It is very complex and with the difficulty in understanding it has led people to simplify the human experience into one little word... soul.

As for Drucker, he is an uncaring person with no respect for life. On his deathbed, he seems to have changed, but his clone hasn't. I compare it to an old man in a hospital who needs attention and care because he is extremely ill and the nurses and doctors are just there for a paycheck. Everyone figures he is old and will be dying soon, so why care. Then one day, they get old and sick and they see how wrong they were for not caring. How sad.

reply

[–] FlyingPie 12 years ago

Your "self" is essentially circuits of neurons. It is very complex and with the difficulty in understanding it has led people to simplify the human experience into one little word... soul.

But I don't think we can deny that even if everything is copied, you would still exist in your own body. The movie even showed that when Drucker talked to his clone. So I think there is still something beyond your memories and neural network that comprises the "soul".

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply

[–] vmelkon 12 years ago

"But I don't think we can deny that even if everything is copied, you would still exist in your own body. The movie even showed that when Drucker talked to his clone. So I think there is still something beyond your memories and neural network that comprises the "soul"."

Copying something doesn't imply that the original is gone or different. It happens to computer processors all the time. All pentium 4 processors are essentially the same and work the same way, run the same programs the same way. They all have the same circuits inside them. You can take that analogy another step further : write a super hyper mega complex artificial intelligence program and make copies of it. All the copies are the same. All the copies will give the same behavior (output) given the same stimuli (input).

In the case of the movie, the 2 Drucker's aren't getting the exact same stimuli (input) therefore they give different behavior (output). Internally, their brain has the same circuits. The difference between a human brain and a computer processor is that the human brain's neurons reorganize while a computer processor's transistors do not.

Therefore, as time progresses, the 2 Drucker's will be less and less alike because they aren't getting the same stimuli. It makes each Drucker unique in that sense and in that sense, there is a soul.

reply

[–] DarrenDirt 9 years ago

^ this discussion makes me think of the most recent season/series of Doctor Who, where Twelve had to be ... copied ... a few times. (But the "original" didn't stick around, so that's certainly different than any actual cloning / digital copying.)

- - -

Chipping away at a mountain of pop culture trivia,
Darren Dirt.

reply

[–] Kinerry 12 years ago

You're using a logical fallacy. The correct way to think is that since it cannot be proven, the default position is that it doesn't exist. Just like Santa and Unicorns and all versions of a god.

reply

[–] FlyingPie 12 years ago

You're using a logical fallacy. The correct way to think is that since it cannot be proven, the default position is that it doesn't exist. Just like Santa and Unicorns and all versions of a god.

Your last sentence makes me think you're being sarcastic? But just in case you aren't, I think your line of thinking is a logical fallacy - Even if something can't be proven (or can't yet be proven), that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. For instance, we weren't always able to prove the existence of atoms, but that didn't mean that they didn't exist.

Also, it would be arrogant for us to claim that just because we can't prove something, that it doesn't exist.

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply

[–] brewster-1 12 years ago

One possible plothole - although it can be arguably be explained by the fact that the character is an idiot - is one of Drucker's goons reasoning that there's no afterlife because there wasn't a bright light or anything. First of all, his memories are digitally transferred - they would only go up to when his memory was last backed up and couldn't possibly include a dead man's memories because there's no such thing. Second, if there is an afterlife, and if clones are not an affront to God, it would be the previous clone experiencing it, and if they are an affront to God, it would be the original guy who we never met (it was established that Drucker's goons had all been cloned at least once).

reply

[–] Darkfalz1979 12 years ago

Wrong, if they had the body available and it's not too badly damaged, they can extract the "self" from the brain.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Thetruthisinhere 12 years ago

wont you be surprised(and simultaneously remember it all) once you die and your veil of forgetfulness is lifted,and you realize why you entered this physical illusory world,which is nothing more than frequency vibration,just like the 5th dimensional layers where you will go upon death,through the bardos levels. Once there,the life review takes place, alongside the ''council of 12'',which is each persons own overall soul consciousness,represented by 12 aspects of said soul,each representing different consciousness levels on different levels of eternal ladder or progression. The soul plan and soul contracts with your family/close friends etc in life,improtant events that occured and will occur,all was an intent of the soul before bith. But also,there are ifinitely many timelines/parallel universes.This will become common knowledge in a few decades in the scientific circle even,they already are making strides towards realization of many of these things. THere is also,due to free will and veil of forgetfulness,always the chance of sidetracking ones soul plan/intended life lessons and different methods of gaining these lessons the soul felt were most needed at this stage in the overall souls life. Each human is only one aspect of an overall soul,the soul in its entirety inside one body would fry said brain,for the body wasnt manufactured to hold all aspects of a soul,that is not the point of it. So as an aspect, theres many versions and timelines of events that occur for each person, each important decisions you might need to make in life, you make, each singular focus point for each path,thus it seems to each version that they are alone. However once one transmogrifies and ascends into the higher levels of unity/5th dimensional consciousness,takes off the veil of forgetfulness(which is needed in order to take this physical life seriously,otherwise all would recall fully who they are,eternal consciousness,and this whole world is a stage/school,and would not be motivated to learn the life lessons as much,for they would know that if the going gets tough and painful,they can return to ''heaven'',soul essence and try again if they wish etc in another life(another aspect of that soul in a new life),so the veil is a must for all intents and purposes,and is willingly chosen.

So you (and most) are up for a good remembrance heh, once ''dead'',which is an illusion,because we come here for a short blink(some 80 years etc) and then return. Gods in amnesia pretty much ;) But I can guess your reaction to my post already, and no need,I know all the potential counterarguments etc,for I was once ''that guy'',and it was part of my own expansion to be that way. So feel free to believe as you do, I just pitched in here,saying that do not debunk something you don't remember or know about ;) All is frequency,basis and building blocks for 3rd dimension,physical level of vibrational frequency is the 4th dimensional levels, the blueprint,and the physical body has a template for it,which is the light/spirit/astral body,which is also the reason for ''phantom pains'' for amputees for ex, they feel the outline still present there,which cant be destroyed in 3D,and so the ''filler'' is missing,energetically it can hurt. Salamanders can regrow their limbs and tail for ex,they have that built in awareness,genetically. Humanity,for evolutionary expansion of consciousness purposes,for now..in this duality consciousness experiment, does not. But will,in time.

Consciousness exists,and in real life,a cloned body(they exist and have for many decades now,on Earth I mean) would not have that spirit of the original body,even if you artificially put in the memories,which are only the computer memory hard disk basically, not the computer user itself(spirit), and that person would ''mimick'' certain behavioural patterns and programmed reactions,based on memory data of said life,but would not have a spirit consciousness(but usually does because another soul already made an agreement to animate said cloned body,maybe sometimes even an aspect of the overall soul that animates(with another aspect of itself) the original body. So in that sense,it is possible to even animate 2 identical bodies by the same overall soul,but not the same soul aspect. And ''overall soul'' is not a singular human spirit, but many.

So there is lee way in that sense,but consciousness exists and is the basis for any creation to begin with,without consciousness there would not be existence,obviously.

In any case,peace, I just shared the info that I have come to realize and confirmed by my own experiences of connection to my own higher self and soul essence connection. Just for contemplation,nothing more. Feel free to dismiss it.

reply

[–] smotpoker81 10 years ago

"they are different people for all extensive purposes."

The phrase is 'for all intents and purposes.' It drives me nut when people use phrases like 'for all intensive purposes' or 'for all extensive purposes.' When you use a phrase, think about the words you are putting together and ask yourself if they make any sense; if not, don't use them and check a dictionary.

"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." - Hank Bukowski

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18237) 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Herreken 11 years ago

I think death could be defeated if the memories were taken from one body & put into the clone, instead of copying the memories. That scene when Drucker clones himself was the scene that always stayed with me after all these years. Kind of a powerful scene. Who is the real Drucker? I guess they both are.

DISPLAY thy breasts, my Julia!

reply

[–] FlyingPie 11 years ago

I think death could be defeated if the memories were taken from one body & put into the clone, instead of copying the memories.

I think that's the same thing though. Either way, you are copying the memories but not preserving the consciousness of the original person in the new clone.

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply

[–] Herreken 11 years ago

That's true. The previous person's memories end up lost when they die.

DISPLAY thy breasts, my Julia!

reply

[–] skullwrath 11 years ago

You're right, this point wasn't visited enough in the movie. My take on it is basically when you die, you die. "Cloning" yourself makes no difference, the 'clone' is a different entity. The only way you could 'live forever' is if your brain was completely preserved and simply transported into a new body. This doesn't occur in the movie, instead they make a 'copy' based on a digital recording of their memories/personality. They even say in the movie you can make an 'older' version of a clone (eg the one of the dr not remembering the conversation) from an old recording. If you die and cloned, the original being still stays dead (this is what the dr's wife was saying, "i'm not her, I just share her memories), the clone is a copy that just happens to share the same memories and personality. for everyone else they would be exactly the same, but the point is it's not a path to immortality because the 'original' person is still dead.

reply

[–] FlyingPie 11 years ago

Exactly. I don't think this movie dealt with that very well.

----------------
Roger, Roger.
You have clearance, Clarence.
What's our vector, Victor?

reply