If you grow a brain in a lab, will it have a mind of its own?

If you grow a brain in a lab, will it have a mind of its own?

There are lots of reasons one might want to grow brains. For starters, they would allow us to study human neurological issues in detail, which is otherwise quite challenging to do. Neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s have devastated millions of people, and brains in a jar (so to speak) could allow us to study disease progression and test potential medications.

The prospect of a lab-grown brain is so compelling that the authors of an editorial in Nature published this week wrote that “the promise of brain surrogates is such that abandoning them seems itself unethical, given the vast amount of human suffering caused by neurological and psychiatric disorders, and given that most therapies for these diseases developed in animal models fail to work in people.”

But there’s a problem. The closer we get to growing a full human brain, the more ethically risky it becomes.

Thanks. I thought the views of the scientists, nearly all queueing up to say an artificial brain couldn't be conscious, were interesting, and perhaps a bit self-serving.

From a materialist point of view, I'd have thought the only difference from a normal brain would be the absence of sensory input. But that raises a lot of questions. If a baby were born without any working sensory connections but otherwise healthy, wouldn't we accord it human rights? If scientists could make a whole brain, wouldn't it only be a matter of time before they added sensory input? Can we be sure consciousness wouldn't develop even without sensory input? And is consciousness the only ethical consideration - what if the scientists just simulated pain signals, without bothering with other sensory input?

It seems to raise quite a lot of questions for non-materialists too. If a brain functions as some kind of connection to the material world for a non-material consciousness, could an isolated artificial brain do the same? For believers in reincarnation, could someone find themselves reincarnated as an isolated artificial brain in a lab?

This topic was raised somewhat briefly in the BBC Inside Science Podcast last week:
Human Consciousness: Could a brain in a dish become sentient?
From about 1 minute to 9 minutes.

There was some seriousness, but at the same time what seemed to me a rather casual view. For example, one opinion was that these things were decades, possibly centuries away (implication: we don't need to think about it?). Another very blasé statement was that we can all agree that consciousness is an emergent property.

Still, they did fill in some of the technical details, so it's worth a listen (though other topics are in the podcast too).

 For believers in reincarnation, could someone find themselves reincarnated as an isolated artificial brain in a lab?

oh man...........................

Someone is probably writing the script already.  Could they target people and say pull in Lincoln or FDR?

I guess the answers to this are going to be centred around the same old question. We all know what that is. For what it's worth, I think it's a terrible idea but I can't conceive of it ever happening.

Thanks. I thought the views of the scientists, nearly all queueing up to say an artificial brain couldn't be conscious, were interesting, and perhaps a bit self-serving.

From a materialist point of view, I'd have thought the only difference from a normal brain would be the absence of sensory input. But that raises a lot of questions. If a baby were born without any working sensory connections but otherwise healthy, wouldn't we accord it human rights? If scientists could make a whole brain, wouldn't it only be a matter of time before they added sensory input? Can we be sure consciousness wouldn't develop even without sensory input? And is consciousness the only ethical consideration - what if the scientists just simulated pain signals, without bothering with other sensory input?

It seems to raise quite a lot of questions for non-materialists too. If a brain functions as some kind of connection to the material world for a non-material consciousness, could an isolated artificial brain do the same? For believers in reincarnation, could someone find themselves reincarnated as an isolated artificial brain in a lab?

Again, the crucial question for me is: qualia. Sensory input is one thing but how we experience them - feel about them - is quite another. If you could grow a brain (or manufacture a brain-like machine) would it have subjective experiences? I think not because I think that is what differentiates mind from brain function, conscious thought from algorithm.

Again, the crucial question for me is: qualia. Sensory input is one thing but how we experience them - feel about them - is quite another. If you could grow a brain (or manufacture a brain-like machine) would it have subjective experiences? I think not because I think that is what differentiates mind from brain function, conscious thought from algorithm.

For me I think a replication of the body's relevant parts could "instantiate" a conscious entity. Of course we've no current idea what the full listing of relevant parts are and it seems more and more that our subjectivity is, if not a holistic phenomenon where the flesh is concerned, at the very least involves more than the brain.

The recent example being the connecting between the gut biome and depression.

I think consciousness is spread throughout reality, though whether this is Idealism or Panpsychism or Something Else is up for grabs. I say this because we have Change, which means we have Causation, and (IMO anyway) Causation requires something very much like Consciousness.

At the same time it does seem at some level Pattern matters - we have the structures in our brain/body for a reason, whether they are Transmitter/Filters or Information Integrators or Something Else. To be animate even at the plant level seems to require certain Patterns (that atomic configurations under organic chemistry?) though this might simply be a rule in this universe (or our section of it).

So getting back to this brain in a vat question...I do think there would be something there. I mean if the brain scan shows absolute confusion and terror, akin to a Hellish existence for our poor chap(ess) in the vat...could anyone of conscience continue the experimentation?

Operationally, for the purposes of this thought experiment, what is the difference between a ‘lab’ and a ‘womb’?

Operationally, for the purposes of this thought experiment, what is the difference between a ‘lab’ and a ‘womb’?

I think the distinction in this case is between the presence or absence of coherent sensory input and feedback. Even simple brains don’t arrive fully functional, do they?

This looks interesting:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2...HYEosl5V8E

Linda

I think the distinction in this case is between the presence or absence of coherent sensory input and feedback. Even simple brains don’t arrive fully functional, do they?

This looks interesting:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2...HYEosl5V8E

Linda

Well that’s easy then: No sensory input = no “quaila” = no “experience” = no “consciousness”. Surely?