?WHY DISEMBODY YOURS?

So basically we've discussed whether disembodyment was even possible
(viewtopic.php?f=4&t=17269&hilit=seperating+the+brain+from+the+body)

Now the question is simply

WHY?

-1) Why would you want to go through the tremendous procedure to remove your brain from your current (in this case) healthy body, just to move into another body (in the case of a meat body) that will also rot away? (please note: just a discussion topic I know the answer)

-2) If you prefer another body, what would yours be?

-3) Would you want to move into a tin can and suffer the detachment from your environment, just to be strong and awesome looking? (please note I am defining robots as tin cans lacking nerve endings)

-4) (MAIN) What is the use of escaping from a dieing body to an immortal one (or disposable) when your brain it self is dieing itself.

1. You wouldn't have your brain in another body, it would be "free floating" and notstuck on or in anoher body.
2. see 1.
3. see 1.
4. your brain only dies when the source of nutrition (the rest of the body) shuts down or if it is diseased and nothing is done.

Brain Bots?, your surly not going to be stuck on a single ceiling your entire life and some people prefer carrying themselves thank you.

Cell deterioration comes to mind.

One of the questions I'm curious about is what bodies would be better than our current ones, what bodies are you eager to try out. Yes we can try them out without having to plant our brains into them.

Answer to no. 2:
Same-ish body, but with the ability to perfectly judge distances and movements etc.
For backflipping and jumping and parkour and stuff. Completely impractical though, so it'd be like a go cart: you don't use it to drive, but to have a bit of fun.

1: Control as many bodies as you want. Note how the brain is not a head? Yeah, you would never care that you are stuck in a brain vault because you have so many bodies. Moreover, if the systems were small enough you ought to be able to move the brain to a new vault or a space ship. The devil's in the latency though, so you would want to have a location near enough to your bodies for a good connection.
2: Whatever the hell I want. I'm personally a fan of giant robots and space ships.
3: What? See #1 above. I can be whatever I want. Gunship? Water filtering plant? Zebra? Whatever I want.
4: Live long enough that new technology will continue to extend your lifespan. If there is a new advance every 50 years that gives you another 25 years, you could live to 175 years easy -- and that's a pessimistic outlook. With CC's tech nothing is out of reach, so who is to say the brain will ever die of "natural causes?"

That said, my own use would be to get a good enough interface to start moving my mind (the "self") to new, more durable hardware.

Personally my reply to no 3 would be, Yes if the robot is agile enough and very strong and makes me look good, but normally id like to feel the ground beneath my feet.

Interesting, yet the question will remain whether the brain will ever be able to be replaced, such a complex organ. Scientists have been working for years and will still work for ages to try to understand the nature of the brain. lol

Remember that you wouldn't be stuck in any body.

I would like to be stuck onto a mechanical body.
That way I would not feel pain, ever.
And chances are, if the material is real durable, I can jump off of tall buildings with no problem.

Although I would rather take a giant mech.

1. Your body may not be healthy, or may eventually become sufficiently problematic that a straight up clone would be simpler than solving each problem individually.
1a. For that matter, if we've got the technology to take out and reimplant a brain, we might have access to better bodies. Even without going into gene manipulation, you could have a body with larger/stronger muscles, tendons, bones... carbon nanotube implants to reinforce bones... armor plates to cover areas that don't get natural protection.
2. I guess it would depend on the actual options.
3. Well I guess if brain swapping was easy enough, you wouldn't have to choose. You could get put into an industrial mech for your dangerous job, and a regular body with better senses for your offtime.
3a. Why have a body at all? Like with cortex command, you could have your fragile brain kept in a fortified room, and use whatever body (or bodies) you needed at the time. Of course, lag would be a ♥♥♥♥♥.
4. Do brains deteriorate? Assuming you can fix Alzheimer's and other brain diseases, I haven't heard of someone dying of "catastrophic brain failure". Sci-fi always assumes there's something to force your brain to shut down eventually, so that sufficient medicine won't result in immortality... but... well, to my knowledge, there's nothing found so far that does that. Regardless, with just the one thing to protect, you'd cut way down on the stuff that can kill you. No body means no heart attacks, for example.

1) I wouldn't. That said, if I had something like cancer which is my body's way of saying that It's a non-conformalist, then I might have the procedure to move to a fully engineered synthetic meat body that is not only superior to the one I just had, but hopefully has a good enough nutrient transfer system that it won't rot anytime soon.

2) Krogan. Four balls and a redundant nervous system ftw. Sterility could be problematic, though...

3) No. Krogan ftw.

4) This is where time factors in. For those who have seen Inception, the mind (theoretically) can age itself in a dream state, meaning that brain decay is also relative to the amount of memory stored. For this, I would use a data-bank to store what I have learned and am taking in. For instance, having a perceptive/recollective enhancement that allows me to store away any fresh memory (making it to where my mind can't warp it) and then erase it from my brain (ensuring minimal brain decay) leaving only a "marker" to point my recollective process to the place where the memory is stored.

As far as biological decay, I believe proper nutrient delivery/waste filtration/reparation systems should prevent most of the aforementioned.

Is there any actual research that suggests the amount sheer memories will tear apart your brain? Wouldn't people with photographic memory die off pretty quickly then, to quote Toaru Majutsu no Index? Logically, if storage space was an actual issue at some point, I'd figure that your brain would delete or compress less important or older memories.

What?
You're taking Inception as an accurate model of brain activity? Seriously?

There is nothing like enough real science on this, it is 100% speculation by people who do not know enough about the subject.
Nothing wrong with that, but none of us can be "right" about any of it in any meaningful way.

More speculation:
So far as I am concerned at all with this, I figure that if the technology for maintaining the life-support to a brain exists, then that means the normal functions should just continue more or less indefinitely. Can any of you perfectly remember everything that has happened to you more than 15 years ago? A "memory overload" should never be an issue, as we forget and re-create memories all the time. A human brain with no additional storage would probably just continue on, forgetting anything nonessential and condensing the rest. More importantly, the mind would never even notice any single change, so it would not be particularly traumatic -- not any more so than normal old age.

Well, nerves are simple things when you look at them individually, it's when there are billions of them that it gets a little complex. But what you could do is hook up artificial nerves to your brain stem and spine to replicate the experience of being alive exactly. You wouldn't need to even be attached to your body because ALL sensory input comes in through your body. You wouldn't know if you were attached or not... philosophy.