Synthetic immortality

Lately the news has been full of dramatic new findings that, if valid, would overturn our understanding of life, mind and cosmos. We’re on the threshold, it is claimed, of the great “singularity,” in which superintelligent machines or human-machine hybrids will take charge of our future and the big questions will be answered or silenced not by those old maids philosophy and theology, but by newer, edgier visionaries with the genius and funding to redescribe or remake the world after a better plan.

In a recent article for the Chronicle of Higher Education, managing editor Evan R. Goldstein profiled one such visionary: Kenneth Hayworth, a neuroscientist engaged in mapping the synaptic connections of mice. His next move will be to canvas the entire “connectome” of the human brain. New techniques for chemically preserving the brain, plastinating it and harvesting minute slices have made this mapping project seem feasible, and it’s possible that it will contribute to a better understanding of diseases like Alzheimer’s.

But Hayworth has a more startling application in mind. He’s opposed to death and thinks he has a solution. On the assumption that memories and identities are written into the brain’s synaptic connections (in philosophy of mind, this would be called eliminative materialism), Hayworth plans to have his brain preserved by the same technique, trusting that in the not too distant future it will be possible to upload his memories, restore his identity and kick away the biological stepladder for good. An “Open Letter to the Medical, Scientific and Government Communities” on Hayworth’s website calls for recognition of the right of individuals to have their brains preserved upon natural death—or (chillingly) even sooner. It has elicited over 200 public signatures with comments like “Better be a suspended brain embedded in a plastic block awaiting possible future revival than be a decomposed, liquefied corpse” and “I want to live forever. If that means existing as software, so be it!”