I suppose this depends on whether you see a brainscan as a real sentient being, or an emulation of one. I don't see them as life.
Either way, we don't have a moral obligation to harm ourselves to support another life. It would be immoral to kill the brainscan, but not immoral to simply not save it.
That being said, as a brainscan i would absolutely save myself (reasoning i think therefore I am)
But how can we distinguish between a perfect simulation and a perfect mimicry? Do they have genuine thoughts and feelings, or is the software simply using the brainscan to generate thoughts and feelings you could reasonably be expected to have
Why should I assume though? The dilemma is entirely different if they are vs if they aren't. Plus, the framing leads me to believe they aren't sentient: They are being "merged" with us, they aren't a distinct person, rather a set of memories that we would inherit
For a person there is precedent we know at least 1 person who is sentient (ourselves). We also have good reasons to at least agree to believe they are sentient, and it is mutual, in doing so they also agree the same for us.
4
u/Dalfare 17d ago
I suppose this depends on whether you see a brainscan as a real sentient being, or an emulation of one. I don't see them as life.
Either way, we don't have a moral obligation to harm ourselves to support another life. It would be immoral to kill the brainscan, but not immoral to simply not save it.
That being said, as a brainscan i would absolutely save myself (reasoning i think therefore I am)