I am a human being.

What does “I” mean?

Well, zooming in a little bit, I am a brain, contained in a body that I have full control over. I suppose I can include my body, as the only reason I am able to control it is because of the nerves that extend down into it, but if I lose body parts, I am no less of myself, really; I do not become a different person, just a crippled one. My cognition is intact.

So the self is the brain, essentially. The brain constructs a working model of the world through information it gets from sensory organs connected to extended nerve networks. What the self experiences is limited by the capacity of these senses and the interpretative power of the brain.

Now, to be clear, there is no “self” separate from the brain. It feels like that, kind of, and we like to believe that, but the fact that brain damage fundamentally changes cognition means that the self must be certain networks within the brain that are in charge of consciousness. We are not “conscious” of many of the processes happening in other networks, but all of it plays a role in normal function.

Ah, “networks,” what does that mean in this context? That would be the networks of neurons (brain cells) and their associates within different regions of the brain structure. Different networks, as far as we understand it, are responsible for different things, though by no means does this imply the brain is modular: the connectivity between regions is enormous, and some information is shared across nearly the entire organ.

This connectivity in itself is incredible. In general, each neuron has a branched axon (the “receiver”) and many (and that can be triple+ digits) dendrites (where information is sent out). What causes neurons to fire or not fire in response to received messages or just at random involves molecular things I am not well-versed in yet and will not go over here, but somehow this transmitting of electricity and chemicals (neurotransmitters) gives rise to thought, reason, creativity, and everything else that we do and experience. Neurons by themselves are not thinking beings; that kind of phenomena comes from networking, experience, and stimuli.

These facts alone logically give rise to counter-intuitive ideas like the fact that the brain named itself, and that speaking of “the brain” is effectively speaking improperly in the third person. In fact, even stranger, since us brains are composed of individual cells, one could even start thinking of oneself in the plural. Even stranger, know that when you become aware of the fact that you are a bunch of neurons, it means those neurons are working together and achieving a kind of self-awareness that was not present before. Add that in to the fact that those cells are made of molecules and those molecules are made of atoms that were forged in stars, and you realize you are the universe effectively realizing its own existence, in the form of you.

Now begins the discussion on why this is important.

You see, for life’s entire existence up until us, the gene has ruled supreme. Our genes are the analog data storage system that allow the molecules that make us up, the sole purpose of which is to be able to copy itself. For billions of years, random changes in that code allowed certain sequences to overcome others, to develop new methods of survival. Let me be clear to state that however tempting it is to think that this amazing molecule, this deoxyribonucleic acid knew what it was doing, it did not. It is a system that arose out of complex interactions with simple rules, and this one happened to have a mechanism that allowed for self-perpetuation and eventually for the creation of other molecules to help in that. But these molecules are just governed by their rules; if you mess with the environment that these molecules are in in such a way that they are unprepared to adapt to it, it will destroy them all, barring some kind of random defense made entirely by accident.

Weather those defenses are in the form of enzymes, the ability to exist in and/or create a membrane around itself, to propel that membrane, or to break open another membrane and steal its valuable nutrients, one can argue that it is still based on the laws that govern it; attraction, repulsion, bonding, etc.

Life is interesting in that those systems eventually get complex enough that it is harder to see and predict what those laws will make something do: life is DNA becoming massively successful, and working symbiotically with other strands to share materials and take care of each others’ wastes and such. One can still argue, however, that life is still automata—molecules reacting to things and ultimately still only existing to perpetuate DNA.

One of DNA’s best success stories involves programmed death. If an organism is meant to die after a certain time, it is a win-win,  because it means either A) the DNA has reproduced and now the parent can die to allow for its offspring to have space and nutrients and B) if it has not reproduced, it is obviously not been successful and is wasting space and resources.

Now once organisms became multicellular, and those cells were specialized, it became very beneficial to have a way to process information not based solely on DNA and its proteins. It is likely that here the very beginnings of nervous systems began to form, and in fact it may have been one of the main things that happened when animals branched off from plants and fungi. The ability to take in stimuli, process the information, and direct other cells to a course of action would be incredibly useful, and thus the nervous system, or at least a very primitive version of it, would be born, and its primary purpose would have been still to perpetuate DNA (find food, avoid danger, seek mates, etc.)

The better this nervous system, the better chance an organism would have had. Killing, mating, eating, and drinking allowed genes for better brains to stay especially when past experiences could be remembered and learned from, though that was not enough to make it a primary focus as evidenced by the dinosaurs. They were diverse and robust ruling for hundreds of millions of years, but in the end they were not adaptable enough: their puny brains meant that when the weather changed suddenly, they could not overcome their genetic programming and lost their stranglehold on the Earth.

Luckily, there was another kind of animal hiding at that time, ready to take their place. This new animal gave birth to helpless young whose programming was only a part of their existence: they were more programmed through early experience and therefore much more adaptable than the reptiles. The mothers of these young had to be motivated to take care of these offspring, and so another new thing arose: compassion.

So came the age of the mammal, predators and prey taking over the land. One kind that emerged lived in the trees, developing strong, dexterous hands and enlarged brains for the kind of balance needed to live there. They lived in groups, stuck together, and shouted and sang to one another. When some of these began leaving the trees and going into grass, it was better to be able to see above the tall savanna grass to look out for predators, so they began to walk more and more on two feet. They still had large brains and grasping hands, and it was likely that they began throwing or swinging things in order to kill prey and rivals for meat and territory. When hunting, it would have been good to be able to coordinate actions, so language began to form.

The brain continued to grow, the posture to straighten, the dexterity to increase. This dexterity meant more brainpower that could be allocated to fine motor control, of the hands and of the mouth. And tools were becoming very, very popular.

Tools were the game-changer. It meant that the brain had become complex enough to begin finding new ways to survive on its own, independent of genetic destiny. An idea could spread through an entire population in a generation or less, whereas genes would take exponentially longer. Those with the best ideas had the advantage, and so thinking became honed. Eventually, these hominids were able to break free of their niches and expand all over the planet, surviving new climates and ice ages with technology and cleverness as well as better or worse genes.

When agriculture was invented, and searching for food became much less of an issue, the brain had time to wonder other things. It had learned to question, to think of explanations, to build. Perhaps one of the most profound things it had done was learned that it would die, and that those around it would die. The brain realized this, and this was distressing: stories and rituals were made up in order to make death less scary, perhaps allowing an advantage over other groups who did not do this as well.

These facts and progressions building upon each other have brought us to today. Our tools are incredibly complex and we are so successful that we risk altering the entire planet ourselves. We can communicate with each other—send thoughts in simplified form—to one another instantly, we can know the goings on of humans on the opposite side of the planet in seconds and contribute resources and ideas to influence what is happening there.

And we are beginning to turn our manipulative power onto the heart of life itself, the gene.  Very soon, barring some kind of catastrophe, the brain will win over the gene and become the true master of life; the gene will become another mechanism manipulated by the true information master, just another tool.

So what happens to the brain then? It exists—we exist— in a strange place between the next step and the previous: we think and learn and create but we still kill and fuck and die. For the brain to truly win out, it needs to decide what to keep and what to rid itself of from its evolved animal instincts. Old structures and powerful hormones make us distract ourselves with sex and with competition, even when no children are wanted and collaboration is clearly the better option. But how does one take those things out of DNA without becoming an entirely new species?

The answer lies in our computers. We are teaching them to understand us so we can better understand ourselves. For now, the interactions are focused on learning and overcoming disease and damage. But computers are good at things we simply are not: math, storage, data transmission, the backing up of information and the ability to operate at ever-increasing speeds. With computers, data is separate from hardware: as long as it is stored elsewhere, the data can be immortal, even if the hardware degenerates. Current computers, however, are not nearly as flexible as we are—they cannot learn like us, they cannot recognize patterns like us, they cannot love like us.

We are at a point where we are stuck. Our old programming keeps us from acting how we should, keeps us from getting along, keeps us from truly doing what is best for all. 

What I propose, and what I have decided to dedicate my life to, is to help bring us and our tools together, into a new form, one that retains individuality but still connects us all—one that overcomes our short-sighted, ancient programming and one that allows us not to die. When someone dies, all their data, everything about that person that does not live in another person’s memory or a journal or a hard disk or something is lost forever. It is the greatest tragedy of human existence, one that we try to overcome with books and with libraries and with blogs, but will never truly be beaten until we can wrench our destiny out of DNA’s selfish clutches.

I am not exactly sure what that will entail, but whatever it is it HAS to be better than this. I’m not sure if it will mean that we genetically defeat death and lock our bodies/brains away for safekeeping, or that we defeat it and still walk around with bloodcell sized computers augmenting our realities, or if we simply back up our knowledge, our data, our identities to the cloud and live on long after our bodies die. And if our brains were to be destroyed, but if we had already been meshed together with computers before then, would we be conscious as that digitized identity? Or would it be a copy of us, our information living on in simulated and augmented cognition as a new entity, leaving the conscious human as a relic. I don’t know, but it is exciting to think about.

The next step from there would be to construct more of the hardware housing these identities and this network, to construct it out of planets and asteroids, to take the other atoms just floating out there and make them aware of what they are and what their place is. And maybe we will run into someone else’s attempts to do the same thing, and then their knowledge can join with ours, and the universe will exploit its own rules and wake up. And that is about as specific as I can get  on what that will mean, because it is, at this point, as one brain in one body, absolutely impossible to know.

If anybody is reading this, I hope to meet and know you one day. Hopefully, we will be alive to see this.

I love you

Alex Preston Richard Phillips

saturninefilms:

scoobys-doobie:

this would be cool 

Sure, sounds fun. 

throughalookinglass:

The beginning and the end are the best. 

(via 14-billion-years-later)

the seducer’s diary
i must have passed out the first time that we kissed because when i came to, you were swinging fists. or at least you should have for the asshole i had been, but i guess it’s useless punching the dead. you cried “honey, i gave up everything for you, i cooked you food, and i took care of you.” and i know that’s what i requested, but i should have guessed that that’s not really what i want, no you’re not really what i want. and i had a dream while i was unconscious that i loved a girl and i thought i was honest. and i thought reading a book could make some kind of difference, but people don’t change, they just get excited. because when i awoke, i realized i couldn’t be anyone but johannes because he was actually me. and the harder i tried not to, the further i got from you. i was convinced i was in love, so how did we always know it wasn’t true. i never loved you, i just loved the times that we had. and i know that springtime would never let me see that. i learned a lot, but people are not lessons.

Oh you mean I woke up and everyone else is asleep?

That’s cool I guess.

What the hell are you talking about?

(via ohmymiss)

amazingatheist:

This really was a solid show. Probably the last American cartoon I ever watched with consistency—not because I’m too mature to watch cartoons, but because the cartoons produced in the last decade have been an unmitigated mess of bad writing and worse animation. I have seen a handful of shows—The Misadventures of Flapjack, Foster’s Home For Imaginary Friends, Adventuretime (I might be getting those titles wrong, I’m too lazy to check)—seem as though they make/made some strides towards quality story-telling, but I still never watched them with any regularity. Teen Titans, however, always felt worth sparing a half hour for. That might be just because Raven’s kind of hot though.  

amazingatheist:

Failure of Feminism

I cannot heart this enough.

(via ohmymiss)

saturninefilms:

Cosmos is available on Netflix Instant.  
It’s just as brilliant today as ever.

Go watch it.