The problem I see is this. I think of consciousness as a Form of something. I do not see it as mere Matter. Matter can be spoken of as being in "bulk". Form cannot. You can have one of a form. You can't properly have one of a Matter. For example, if I ask you to bring me some sand and you ask me how much and I reply "twenty three", you will be confused. This is because I have asked you to bring me Matter and when you ask me how much I reply as if we are talking about Forms. Forms have an identity, so to say. They can be labelled. A spade full of sand can be thought of as a Form. You could ask me how many spadefuls of sand do I want and if I answer "twenty three" then I will have given you a proper answer, as we are then both talking in terms of Forms.
Now when you start talking about consciousness as being merely a physical layout of matter, i.e. the brain, then it seems plausible that consciousness could be increased by adding more in terms of physical matter, or by decreasing it by taking away in terms of physical matter. Indeed, I could double the size of consciousness by linking two brains together, or triple the size by bringing three brains together.
The mistake I think you make is to think of consciousness as being like Matter. I think that consciousness can only be thought of as a Form. However, you believe that consciousness is Matter and can be thus be clumped together. But how do you make sense of this? Consciousness is self-awareness, but if consciousness is Matter, then there is no self. This is a strange paradox. You do believe that an inidvidual is an individual, don't you? With his own identity and who is the same person as 5 minutes ago and who will be the same person in 5 minutes time? Because if you do not accept that then you surely will run into strange paradoxes as there would no longer be any sense in forgivenes, since the person who did the abhorent act is no longer with us, and it makes no sense to pay a worker his/her wages, since the worker is no longer with us, and it makes no sense to fulfill your promises, as the person you made your promise to is no longer with us. It does not make sense to talk of I, you, we, us, him, her. This whole identity language would be based on a false premise, that consciousness is a Form. This is only if you believe that consciousness is Matter.
This is why I think that to replicate all the physical aspects of a human body and expecting it to acquire consciousness is highly implausible and which would create strange paradoxes.
I see.
Let's put some order in what you said.
When you talk about "form" you are talking about dichotomic "yes/no" logic. As in, "X is Y" or "X is not Y".
And when you talk about "matter" you are talking about fuzzy logic. As in, "X can be Y up to a certain degree", or "X1 is more like Y than X2".
So you apply dichotomic logic to consciousness. As in, there are no degrees of consciousness.
I apply fuzzy logic to consciousness. So I assume there can be degrees of consciousness.
You say you see a paradox in assuming consciousness is a fuzzy concept extended into the material world because there would be NO clean limit as where the self ends and where the non-self begins.
I do NOT see a paradox in this, because I apply fuzzy logic to the concept of "individuality" itself.
After all, such a concept IS already fuzzy in nature if you consider the concept of "body".
Take your body. It's made of matter, so it follows fuzzy logic.
There is NO clear distinction about where your body ends and the non-body begins, more so if you go at microscopic level. Yet, when analyzed at a macroscopic level, you can see your body is quite distinct.
So why shouldn't the same applies to "thoughts" and "self-identity"?
Especially if you consider that we DO feel degrees of consciousness, for example when falling asleep or waking up, or from anesthesia, or coma.
And we do feel "glitches" in the sense of continuity, take for example deja-vu.
And people do lose sense of continuity when they have total amnesia.
And how would dichotomic yes/no consciousness work regarding birth?
Do we get a "mind" when we are born, and it's inactive until the brain is "powerful enough" to instantly turn the whole "consciousness" from off to on?
How about monozygote twins? Are we born with "n" minds and only one turns active when the material brain is powerful enough and all the other minds stay off?
And in case the same entity "splits" into more entities like in the case of identical twins, the minds get divided?
Topic: 'Consciousness signature' discovered spanning the brain