If we managed to perfectly simulate a fruit fly brain would it mean that we could theoretically also simulate a human...

glad that im not only user here who thinks this way

OK where is the line? What about fish? horses? Dogs? What about our primate brothers? Do they have a "soul"?

I was being ironic but whatever

Learn the different between irony, satire, and sarcasm before you post

so you were just pretending to be retarded?

your thread's stupid, so yeah.

based

considering most (((peoples))) brains aren't much more complex than that of a fruit fly, I'd take a wild guess here and say "yes we can"

Yes, obviously.

It's an 18+ website, friend.

Given how there are brainlets who unironically believe this and how this place is full of brainlets, "lol I was joking" just doesn't work.

can you just leave this shitty thread die

can you explain how this correlates?
why can a soul not be simulated?

I think it's only a matter of time.

Humans are the only creatures on this God-made Earth with a soul. The World was made for us to live, repent, and save ourselves. Everything else is a tool for us to use.

Because current science does not know how or why souls exist.

do you realize that you could put this simulated brain in eternal hell that lasts trillions^trillions of years from it's perspective?

there have been plenty of cases where something can be simulated before it is understood
not everything is discovered by working backwards from the result

define human

How can you prove that what you are simulating is a soul, nothing more, nothing less?
Literal human being, don't play dumb.

The map is not the territory.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map–territory_relation

>How can you prove that what you are simulating is a soul, nothing more, nothing less?
this is beside my point
my point is that you don't necessarily need to understand what a soul is or how it's made to simulate one
"how do you know if you're simulating one?" doesn't discount my argument

If you make a machine that simulates a soul, how can you know it is indeed a machine that simulates a soul?

you just wrote the same question again, and i'll repeat my answer, that is beside the point
yes, you'd need to understand what a soul is to determine if you're simulating one, but not knowing if you're simulating one doesn't prevent you from simulating one

Non-meme answer: Far too computationally expensive even at a level of protein-protein interactions. Simulation of 1 second for mycoplasma takes months, and still too flimsy for pathways to stay running for long. Best shot is high level brain mapping and manually engineering emulator for the low level stuff - neuron signalling, gene expression, transcription factors, endocrine regulatory networks...

what about neanderthals? they were pretty similar to humans and we know they had means of creating culture

Well then that remains a mystery and completely irrelevant unless someone does indeed make and prove a soul machine. Until then, only humans have souls, God bless us all.

Yes, and there is also no way to proove that your current thoughts and feelings aren't simulated

Citation needed. Also which of the 10k gods?

Imagine a sex robot with the mind of a fruit fly

>Citation needed.
The Holy Bible.
>which of the 10k gods?
There are 10k gods? There is one God, the Christian God.

>Well then that remains a mystery and completely irrelevant
why would it be irrelevant to the statement "no [a human brain cannot be simulated] because only humans have souls"?
if you simulate a human brain, and through the process you're using to do so, you end up also simulating a soul, even if you aren't aware of it, you are simulating a soul
so my question to you is this, can you prove that it is actually impossible to simulate a human soul?

>There is one God, the Christian God.
have you read the bible? there are more gods dumb retard you just can't pray to them

You'd have to deep learn the soul. It's like computer hardware, which can be virtualized, but still needs an OS.

>fruit fly brain
>human brain
I'm not sure on the exact logistics but it is probably exponentially harder to simulate the human brain in comparison to that of a fruit fly.

Since when became hip and cool to be christian in 4chin?

You are assuming a soul is created and active upon brain activity or simulated brain activity. This isn't true because souls leave the body after death and continue their existence in the afterlife. Nowhere is it even hinted that a man can create a soul with his own hands.
>why would it be irrelevant
Because if one cannot come up with a counter-example, the Bible cannot be disproven.
>there are more gods
There are false religions and mythical creatures but one true God.
I'm giving this thread one more post before it derails.

How van you prove your god is the real one?

>Because if one cannot come up with a counter-example, the Bible cannot be disproven.
something doesn't become true just because it can't be disproven

i could argue that space aliens literally shat out the earth 500 trillion years ago, and while nobody could disprove this with certainty, i also have no good evidence to back my claim up, which makes my claim, as they say "bullshit".

Because the prophecies that long predate the Coming were fulfilled, in great detail. Archaeological findings and historical research show that the events in the Old and New testament did indeed occur, with great detail. That's enough for me to believe. This thread is officially off-topic.

This can be said for any other religion

This is 4channel, newfag.

>just because
>space aliens
I wholeheartedly agree, it follows basic logic.
>which makes my claim "bullshit"
No, it makes your claim undecided. Boolean logic is enough to answer all questions in and out of the Universe, so long as they are correctly asked and we have a perfect universal valuation function.
What I said was, if you don't understand what a soul is, you can't simulate one because you wouldn't discern when you indeed have simulated one, because so far only humans are known to posess souls, meaning random-chance findings are not likely (or impossible).
Some select few which overlap but do not converge with Christianity. I cannot reply to this trail of thought as it is not technology.

Why call me a newfag since it would be more likely to a real newfag to call this place 4channel? I mean, it was not a long time ago this thing was renamed.

>because so far only humans are known to posess souls
Can we take em out?

As in kill them? Sure, everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial.

>What I said was, if you don't understand what a soul is, you can't simulate one because you wouldn't discern when you indeed have simulated one
you would need to know what constitutes a soul to know IF you've simulated one
my argument is, knowing that we do not know what constitutes a soul, that in the process of simulating a human brain, we may satisfy the requirements for simulating a soul at the same time, without knowing it
situations like this are known to happen

>No, it makes your claim undecided.
that part was a bit of a joke, i'm sure you understood what i meant by it

Like it or not, this is a correct post.

We could simulate the processing that goes on but that doesn't mean it'll lead to consciousness. In order to get consciousness we have to understand what it is. At this point in time, we don't even fully understand why we need sleep.

I think you'd need a very generous definition of 'human' to call a simulated human brain 'human'. Let's see if I remember my discrete math,
human -> soul
human -> brain
---------------------------
brain -> soul ?

I can't come up with an equivalent transformation to prove it. What do you think?

so a 1 core 500ghz cpu with 20tb of ram

Lol maybe YOUR brain isn't more complex than a fruit fly but mine certainly is.

Furthermore fruit flies don't have "brains". They have nerve ganglia that respond to stimuli. It is orders of magnitude less complex than a mammalian brain. Even something small like a squirrel's brain is far more complex.

Define "soul".

>In order to get consciousness we have to understand what it is.
not necessarily true

to the best of our knowledge, a human brain is a human in it's most basic form, you can replace any other part of the body without changing who the person is
if there is a soul, it's related to the brain
therefore, simulating a human brain is equivalent to simulating a human, and may also include simulating a human soul

/thread

>may
Maybe we'll talk again in time

i'm not saying you definitely can simulate a soul
i'm not convinced souls even exist
i'm just arguing that it is possible to simulating something without fully understanding it, and there's no reason to assume souls are any different in this regard

I believe it's true for consciousness. People have had entire portions of the brain removed and still remained conscious even if they couldn't express themselves. This suggests that consciousness is more than a side effect of having a complex brain. Ergo we need to understand consciousness because it seems to be independent of neural machinery. Dogs are conscious. They know who their owners are. They demonstrate the capacity to learn and they have emotions. Animals with these characteristics are far more than biological machines like insects. If all we needed to do was simulate a brain then we could prove whether consciousness is a result of the convergence of neural machinery. Until then I stand by my postulate.

Christianfags of this thread, what are your thoughts on the LGBT people?

i don't think the emergence of consciousness negates the possibility of it being a deterministic machine
i believe it's easily possible that the brain is currently too complex for us to understand right now, and as such, seems a little bit magic, like it can't be reproduced
not understanding something doesn't mean it's magic, it's just a matter of perception

i can't prove there isn't something more to it, but i also don't believe you can prove there is
i'm not arguing one way or the other, rather, i'm arguing against sticking with one side, we don't know enough to say for sure whether there is OR isn't something more to it

I think it's totally fine to strive for salvation and at least pretend to live a normal life. However, giving into the temptations, parading it, recruiting others for your freedom fights, and above all manipulating others with your mental statute, is a vast collection of sins. Basically get your CoC off my fucking project.

God loves to pull pranks.

Iterating to chaos attractor of deterministic phenomena is deterministic, but definitely not predictable.

What about people with DID (multiple personality)? On fMRI scan the individual alts largely live in isolated regions of hippocampus and amygdala. Does this suggest "soul overload" or something?

Brains can't be simulated with computers because brains are inherently unlike computers. No matter how powerful a traditional computer is or how clever algorithms run on it, the computer will never have an understanding of the symbols it operates on (binary numbers). A computer will never directly observe the world around it. Reality can not be simulated, it can only be lived.

Attached: tumblr_p0z6o1AQLi1wflv45o1_1280.png (1080x1920, 607K)

fuck off philosopher fag

Not sure but we should simulate the fruit fly first. Drosophila. They don't have brains, insects have "nodes" through their nervous system. Basically only a peripheral nervous system no CNS like humans.

Our brains are literally computers. They're just mostly analog instead of digital. You can perform all computable computations with both analog and digital computers. That is, they are equivalent in fundamental ability.
Normally an analog computer isn't extremely useful because of noise, which lowers the resolution of calculations. Our brain doesn't usually need high resolution ability for primitive calculations though, so it's not a problem that the signals are all fuzzy. We're not used to building things like this, where if you lose a chunk of an answer it's no big deal. Humans like to build things in a structural way, but our brain was built over time through evolution. We're dipping our toes in the idea of building fuzzy things with machine learning, but the field is still extremely young and undeveloped, despite all the promises of AI by next week/month/year/decade, it's going to be a long time.

The argument against computationalism is thar our brains directly observe reality through senses - without any computation involved, in an inherently sub-symbolic manner. A computer as we know it can never do this, all it can do is receive input (e.g. bits from a sensor) that has no meaning outside the symbolic framework it operates in. This is held by me and other anti-computationalists as a key difference between true cognitive and artificial computational intelligence.

>our brains directly observe reality through senses
In the same way a transistor directly observes reality through an electromagnetic field on the gate. We're all in the same physical world. The same harnessing of material properties is used by biology and engineering. Human engineering is just more purposeful and structural.
>without any computation involved
I seriously hope you don't believe our brains work like magic. Your sensory organs pick up physical interactions and encode them as signals. The brain interprets these signals and produces a simulation of your reality. This can be experimentally shown. Our reactions to things is not instantaneous, there is computation involved. We are also very far from perfect in our observations, which is demonstrated by the presence of optical illusions and such. Those illusions take advantage of holes in our ability to simulate the complete world through our vision.
>This is held by me and other anti-computationalists
Your beliefs are shaped by a lack of understanding. Our brain and body is a fantastic and wondrous piece of biological machinery, but it "merely" has taken advantage of the physical world in a tremendous way. We can eventually build machines other than ourselves which work similarly, but our understanding of things has not reached that point yet.

This

Even if we have a soul, there is no evidence that it is required to simulate a human brain.

Because ghost in the shell.
Something that has something to do with the quantum realm.

>Something that has something to do with the quantum realm.
So everything has souls.

>Something that has something to do with the quantum realm.
He said "define", not vaguely describe.
Seeing all matter and the universe itself has something to do with the quantum realm, you answer is effectively "everything, but also maybe nothing".
Probably the worst of answers.

Also, Ghost in the Shell is fiction.

our brains only run at a clock speed of like 100Hz. It should be super easy

Neanderthals didn't actually exist dipshit

Fuck. I'd take an "eternal life" even if it was in reality a second in a machine. I'd take any chance to leave behind the shit hole of reality to live what could be a seemingly endless dreamland.

With billions of neurons that have a fan-out of in the 10,000's, with possible analog signaling mechanisms (temperature, pressure) and a huge number of known chemical signaling mechanisms. Other than that, yeah super simple.

But we have evidence they did, and genetic evidence they interbred with modern humans.

But we have evidence they did, and genetic evidence they interbred with modern humans.

Yikes cringe
Reminder that in the Hebrew version of genesis God is sometime referred to as Gods which directly confirms it probably had other Gods or at least was fine with worship of other Gods until later on.

They did, this is no disputed in any meaningful way. We believe most non African homosapians today have some neanderthal DNA.

We'll never properly simulate any complex brain, because animals, including humans, are driven by extremely complex chemical interactions that we will never understand to such a level that we can program a computer to replicate it. The only hope of that ever happening is if we first made an AI that could improve itself and so became smart enough to program a brain for us, and that presents its own problems.

Because by it's nature it is non-scientific.

what does "non-scientific" mean in this context?

Based and redpilled

>the quantum realm
So you have no idea and basically you're full of shit.
>But I FEEL my soul!
Fucking religiontards.

Our brain clock speed would be our heartrate.

It can't be tested.

It can't be tested.

That's as retarded as saying your CPU clock speed is your AC frequency.