By now most readers of this website are familiar with the plans of the transhumanists to download and upload human personalities, or rather, their memories, to computers and then to upload those into "clones" to achieve a kind of immortality, a process my co-author Scott D DeHart and I outlined in our book Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas. As we argued briefly in that book, there were two fundamental assumptions at work behind this: the first was that memories were located in the brain exclusively, and were therefore nothing more than certain physical-chemical relationships that constitute the "memories" and that these were transferable. Personality was, in short, based on materialist assumptions. The second assumption is a more subtle and indeed metaphysical and theological one, and one more or less implicit to Western culture, even to the atheist, though many would not know it: that assumption is that soul and person are the same things.
The debate just changed, and rather dramatically, for now there is open acknowledgement of the actual scientific attempt to resurrect individuals, as the following article shared by Mr. V.T. indicates:
The essence is what one might expect, another corporate grab for power, even over the issue of death and personhood itself:
Scientists are getting ethical permission from health watchdogs to resurrect dead people by using a combination of regeneration therapies. Starting this year, the groundbreaking Project Reanima will primarily use stem cells to stimulate the regrowth of neurons in clinically dead patients. Bioquark Inc., an American biotech company, is one of medical companies given the green light to conduct the trials on 20 brain dead patients from traumatic injuries.
Leading the team is Dr Himanshu Bansal, Indian specialist who works with Biotech companies Revita Life Sciences and Bioquark Inc,. The team will use a combination of therapies, which include injecting the brain with stem cells and a cocktail of peptides, as well as deploying lasers and nerve stimulation techniques. The procedure has been shown to bring patients out of comas.
The resurrection technique using stem cells will test whether parts of the dead patients' central nervous system can be brought back to life. Scientists believe that the brain stem cells may be able to erase their history and re-start life again based on their surrounding tissue. The process is similar to that in creatures like salamanders who can regrow entire limbs. (Emphasis added)
There is some suggestive corroborative news that would seem to rationalize the process, according to this article shared by Mr. T.M.:
What's intriguing in the latter article is that there is no explanation for brainwave activity continuing after clinical death, and particularly, the loss of oxygen and circulation from the heart:
Is there life after death? Science can’t yet answer that question – but doctors in a Canadian intensive care unit say that a patient showed ‘persistent’ brain activity after death.
The activity was detected 10 minutes after the patient was certified dead.
Doctors had confirmed death by the absence of a pulse, and a lack of reaction in the pupils – but the patient still appeared to have ‘delta wave bursts’, similar to what happens in sleep.
The researchers admit that there is no biological explanation for how brain activity could continue several minutes after the heart has stopped beating, according to Science Alert.
The scientific study of life, in some form or fashion, after death has been a small but growing field for many decades. But I am going to suggest that these two articles must be taken together, for it is that "taking together" that forms the basis of today's high octane speculation. Pose this question: What motivations might be behind the attempt to "resurrect" the neurons, and hence, brain function, of long dead people, beyond the obvious ones of attempting a "resurrection" at all? If one speculates a bit about the second article, what it might suggest is something that I personally have long thought, namely, that the mind and the brain are two different things, and that the former is something like a non-local, and hence, ultimately non-material phenomenon, and that the latter functions like a radio receiver of sorts, tuning it is, or transducing it into this material existence. This runs counter to neat schemes of Cartesian dualism or even epiphenomenalism. It could indeed be that the creation of a unique brain by human reproduction brings into existence an information matrix - the mind with all its non-locality - that was not there previously. It would be akin to an ancient Christian doctrine called "traducianism" (a doctrine which, incidentally, many believe to be a heresy and which was viewed that way by the medieval Western Church).
If one takes or assumes this view for the sake of argument (and for the sake of our high octane speculation of the day), then another purpose for the "resurrection" experiments presents itself, namely, that a hidden purpose might indeed be to investigate the properties of consciousness, and particularly, should the physical side of the experiments prove successful, whether or not the same person is re-instantiated, or if, indeed, "someone" or some thing else comes through, or nothing at all. In all cases, the cosmological implications are immense, if viewed from the standpoint of modern physics which suggests the importance of observers to all physical observation, for in bringing back into a timeline someone who has already passed out of it through death, is that timeline itself modified, and hence, is there a connection to multi-verse hypotheses? Is this, really, therefore, the reason that - at least so far as Old Testament religion is concerned - there are warnings against sorcery, i.e., against necromancy, i.e., because of its cosmological implications?
Whatever the answers to those questions may be, merely asking them highlights the dangers that modern science, unbridled as it is from any moral restraints, poses.
See you on the flip side...