3

Non-reductive physicalists have a view in dualism that creates an idea of mental properties that can be mapped to neurobiological properties, but said mental properties are not ontologically reduced to matter itself. Quantum teleportation involves the destruction of the physical body on one side and the complete reformation of the body on the other side from different atoms/photon/etc. than the body was originally composed in the almost indentical same manner as before (they are, in practice, the same). This seems to create a problem in regards to the use of quantum teleportation and the idea of the mind in non-reductive physicalism for me. I have two conclusions that I can draw, both from non-reductive physicalism.

  1. Since in quantum teleportation the entirety of the physical body is destroyed and reformed on the other side (assuming that quantum teleportation would be possible for humans), the mind would be different because the matter of the brain has been changed and the mind arises from the brain (although the brain composition is the same).

  2. Because the matter on the other side would be entirely composed in the exact same way, the mind would be essentially the same because the brain would have all its memories and processes which give rise to the mind.

The question is ask is which process is better related to non-reductive physicalism. More so, can the mind be trascendent within the non-reductive physicalism?

closed as off-topic by John Am, Joseph Weissman Feb 18 '17 at 16:06

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions that push a personal philosophy with no question beyond "am I right" or "what do you think" are off-topic here as this is not a blog. It's ok to express unique opinions, but you must have an actual, answerable question to go with them." – John Am, Joseph Weissman
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

3

Since in quantum teleportation the entirety of the physical body is destroyed and reformed on the other side, the mind would be different because the matter of the brain has been changed and the mind arises from the brain (although the brain composition is the same).

Your interpretation of quantum teleportation here is incorrect: Real world quantum teleportation is limited and can't be applied to entire human bodies the way you describe. This is due to the no-cloning theorem (Wootters, William; Zurek, Wojciech (1982). "A Single Quantum Cannot be Cloned". Nature 299: 802–803. ). So the question of copying a mind using quantum teleportation is moot.

The question is ask is which process is better related to non-reductive physicalism. More so, can the mind be trascendent within the non-reductive physicalism?

Physicalism (see SEP article) is the position that the mind is entirely dependent on the physical, so by definition, the mind for a physicalist can't transcend matter, regardless of whether they are reductionist or non-reductionist. The moment you allow the mind to transcend in some way or another, you are for all practical purposes introducing a form of dualism.

  • Mind is not meant to be here some mental operations, but rather a concern for possibilities is what is at stake. Bodies are impregnated with possibilities and mind is one of them, is it not? So, I don't see how this is relevant because you can be a pluralist without buying into dualism--this response assumes some mutually exclusive false dichotomy. – AnthropoTechnics Mar 23 '16 at 21:32
  • @MyronMosesJackson I'm not understanding your position here: Dualism is a special case of Pluralism, where the plural corresponds to 2 categories. How can one be a pluralist without buying into dualism ? – Alexander S King Mar 23 '16 at 21:47
  • Hi Alexander. Pluralists reject dualism--it doesn't go far enough and overplays the importance of dyadic relations. Conversely, one does not need to be a dualist in order to be a pluralist, as you are implying. Hence, I deny that dualism is "a special case" of pluralism. It is more accurate to say it is a "a special case" of monism. – AnthropoTechnics Mar 24 '16 at 0:08
  • Does the OP's teleportation require cloning of quantum state? Or can the destination somehow 'absorb' the state of the source, such that you are somehow transferring quantum state instead of cloning it? What you rule out is transporter duplicates, if human identity depends on quantum state. There could be no Second Chances. :-) – labreuer Nov 19 '16 at 1:16
2

The problem with producing exactly the same body is implicit in quantum dynamics itself. One simply cannot control matter at some level, there is no exact match between the behaviors of two elementary particles.

The most prominent of these 'intermediate' positions that allow for coordination between mind and body but retain dualism, above emergentism but below independent dualism, rely upon quantum indeterminacy to explain the 'slop' between mind and body in the first place, and how the two can be independent, a la Roger Penrose.

If what is more than the body is explained by the fact that matter behaves indeterminately, then acting as if it could be reconstructed determinately defies their own logic. So they do not believe quantum teleportation would be possible, you can duplicate the body functionally, but the mind of the old body is still being killed, as its sub-physical quantum state is lost.

  • Sorry, but as a physicist I cannot let that stand. It is possible and has been experimentally confirmed to transfer a quantum state, despite the fact that you cannot measure it. That's exactly what quantum teleportation is about. The idea of teleporting a human has many issues, but this is not one of them. – celtschk Sep 20 '16 at 17:24
  • 2
    @celtschk "quantum teleportation" as you are using it is not as the OP is using it. Right? In the definition you are talking about there is no way in which (to quote the OP) "the entirety of the physical body is destroyed and reformed on the other side". Things pass over gaps and appear on the other side of them, but there is no reconstruction process. If you want to quibble about words, take it up with the OP, whose usage simply does not agree with yours. Any reconstruction process is really impossible. – jobermark Sep 20 '16 at 19:22

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.