Can we transfer the "I" and live forever?

It would be important to understand what it is to be "I" and why I am my "I" and not just any other "I".

If we narrow down what it means to be "I", we will be able to understand if we are "I" from the moment we are born or if, on the contrary, we are never the same "I".

In other words, is the "I" a concept anchored to a biological body?

This question is of great interest to us if we want to live beyond what the body can live.

Let us imagine a person who turns 40 years old. He looks in the mirror and knows who he is, doesn't he?

He is that person who has been living for 40 years and whose life experiences have made him what he is.

He has a name, a profession, a sentimental situation, a family, a home, enemies and friends, etc....

But what happens if that person suffers from amnesia?

He wakes up, looks at himself in the mirror and he is no longer the same person he was 40 years ago. He does not recognize his face, nor does he remember his past. Of course, neither does he remember his present nor his future plans.

Thus, that person is not the same Self he was a few hours before.

If he never recovers his forgotten memories, he will be a different person. Very different.

So is an "I" the mixture of experiences, thoughts and beliefs, or is it the body?

If we could transmit the experiences (being all the experiences and thoughts remembered) to another mind, would it become the former self?

A body that is not the one in which the previous Self existed, if it happens to have all the memories (and only those memories) of another person with another Self, which Self will it be?

The previous Self, since that body already has a permanent Self?

The new one, since those remembered mental data can be transferred to another mind?

A new "I", since the "I" is formed by the mixture between a body and some given experiences?

Could we duplicate an "I" by keeping the body with those memories and creating a copy in a new structure?

Could two "I's" say who the "I" is?

Can there be more than one copy of the same Self?

These are basic questions we must ask ourselves in order to understand what an "I" is.

For example, when we begin to dream, are we the same person, the same Self?

Am I me every time I dream?

Well, as I understand it, I am not really always Me.

In some dreams I remember my stored data and my history. I know who I am and who my current partner is, for example.

But in others I don't. My partner is a different person and I believe it. So I begin to experience that reality and act on the stored data I can access.

So am I Me in the dream?

Maybe I am not. In fact, perhaps, the Self is a result of the stored data.

If the Self is a result of stored data, every time I dream, I am a new Self with a story behind it. And that story tells me who I am (or who I think I am).

If I suffer from amnesia that affects long-term memories, I will be a different Self.

Perhaps, the most accurate definition is that a body does not store a Self, because if you delete data, that Self will change.

Each time we wake up, perhaps it will be like during sleep. The data that is loaded into our mind will tell us who I am. But if that data were not loaded, I would not be able to know that I am Me. I would be a different person, but with my body.

A Self is the result of a mind and the data it stores and can retrieve.

And this makes us ask ourselves an important question.

Is the "I" the same as the Consciousness?

Because if the same body can have several "I's", then there is something that is prior to the "I" and that allows us to experience.

We could define the "I" as a consequence of the experiences and beliefs that someone experiences.

Well, let's get down to business.

Who experiences an experience?

Who experiences when waking up from bed and getting dressed?

And who experiences when starting to dream?

The simplest answer would be to say Me.

But this is not true. If I suffer from amnesia, the one who will experience will not be Me, but someone else.

If I suffer from mental dissociation, that Self who will experience will be different from the one who normally does.

Was it Me during that time, or was it a different person?

One of the big problems with personality disorders is that a mind cannot access certain areas of data during the time that the disorder manifests. Therefore, that "I" will be different from the one it was before it manifested.

That is to say, a person who becomes hostile because of a paranoid outbreak, does not have the capacity to be the same "I" he/she was before. He simply cannot access the data that tells him who he is and tells him how to respond to life events.

And, if he cannot access that data, literally that person is not the same Self he was. It's a totally different self.

Because the Self is formed by someone's history, which totally defines the belief of who they are.

And, it defines how they react to the world.

The crucial point we face is to understand what it is that allows me to have the subjective experience that defines who I am, and that differentiates me from the rest of the "I's" I live with and remember.

I would sum it up by calling it Consciousness. The ability to experience subjectively.

That experiencer begins in white when it is formed and possesses a life of its own. Life itself is only a subjective experience.

In fact, every form of life has its subjective experience.

But, as that life is born, as it begins to experience, there is a filter of perception that will totally define the experience.

So, a plant will have a different experience than a mouse. Or a bacterium.

A human has a perceptual filter and a brain capacity that will result in a very specific type of experience.

Every instant experiences are stored and the accumulation of instants will give rise to the belief in a Self.

But an "I" does not exist, in that it can disappear without the disappearance of life and the capacity to experience, creating a new "I" immediately.

The Self being the consequence of subjective experiences and beliefs in a being, the question would be whether that Self would be attached to a body.

But the answer is no, because a body can be several different "I's" without affecting the body itself.

Consciousness is what allows us to experience and, therefore, to generate an "I".

Consciousness is a substratum that we call experience, the succession of instants in a physical environment (be it "real", dreamed or imagined).

But if the "I" is not attached to the body, we should know if it can be replicated in another structure.

The answer is that this possibility could only arise where consciousness exists.

Because, if we store the data of an "I" in a structure, be it physical or virtual, it will not cease to be a pile of data that defines that "I".

But for that "I" to come to life, there should be a Consciousness behind it. That is to say, someone should begin to experiment with that data as a filter.

And not only that, but a body defines the filter of perception that will define the experience and, therefore, each "I".

If we insert the Self of a human into a plant, the data will not be processable from the mind so different from the latter.

Memories and beliefs, defined by a system of perception based on the senses and our ability to reason, would be meaningless within a plant mind, with a system of perception so different from our own.

Then, in order to transfer an I, it would have to be done to a structure identical to the body from which it comes. At least, identical in terms of the system of perception, taking into account that two humans do not perceive in the same way.

But if we could do that and clone a body and some data and load them into the new body, would they both be the same Self?

No, they would not share the same mind. Yes, an exact one, but not the same one.

The transfer of an Ego to a copy, in a scenario where both individuals coexisted simultaneously, would result in two different Egos.

Both would believe themselves to be the same Self, but only one of them would be.

And, if one of the two died, there would have been two different identities, one of which would have experienced death, and the other would not.

But suppose that first Self is eliminated at the same instant that the second is born, so that they do not coincide in time.

Would the fact that they would be two Egos in two different bodies change anything? Would there be a continuity?

I would say no. That, quite simply, two individuals with the same experiences would have had two different lives. One of them would have died, and the other would not even know that it had just been born, because it would continue the life where the original self had left off.

However, it would not be the same self. Not the same. Yes, an identical Self, but not the same.

The original self would have died and would not experience as the new self.

However, the second "I" would experience believing itself to be the first "I". That is, it would be Consciousness experiencing with certain data.

For a relative of that person, there would be no difference, because in practice both would be the same Self.

Because it would have the experiences and everything that would define the relationship between the two.

However, the original Self would be dead and would no longer experience at his or her side. Another individual would believe himself to be the first Self, and in a certain way he would be.

For practical purposes, in interactions with other individuals, it would be like a continuity.

But for the purposes of subjective experience, the first Self would have given up his/her experience in favor of someone who would not be him/herself.

Thus, the set of experiences that define an "I" do not transfer the experience from one body to another, but create a copy and, when the Consciousness is initiated in that other body, it will be a new "I" with all the data of that old "I".

Wouldn't that be like dying and reawakening?

Yes and no. That Self that has died would not be initiated in the new Self. In fact, the new Self would not possess the subjective experience of death.

But yes, because Consciousness is a substratum and is initiated with each birth and ends with each death.

It is being born and dying infinite times at every instant.

As there is Consciousness in a structure and data identical to the previous one, the subjective experience would be, for practical purposes, as if that "I" had not died.

For that "I", everything would be a continuation.

As always, everything is based on subjective experience, which has a beginning and an end. The subjective experience of that individual would go through several births and deaths, which would end with each I that died and would begin with each I that was born.

It is a complex subject to understand, but necessary to understand the implications of the transference of an "I" to another structure.