John,
I'm going to stop here (unless you want to continue) - and not hound you :).
But I would like you to see something -
you utterly refused to answer my question re: what is your model? It's not a
hard question to start answering - i.e. either you do have some kind of
model or you don't. You simply avoided it. Again.
And a major point I'm making is that - everyone is doing that. Everyone is
picking some very limited aspect of consciousness that is important to
them - "experience", "qualia," "self-consciousness." And no one has or is
offering a model of the whole.
But we can and must produce a model and point to what we're talking about.
Here is someone who is conscious:
http://www.bized.co.uk/images/man_remote.jpg
We can observe consciousness from the outside with such a picture (or better
still clip) - and point to those parts of him that are conscious and how and
what parts of him like nerves, produce that consciousness .
And we can model his consciousness from the inside:
http://electrojusa.iespana.es/images/philips_25pt_7304_television__47429.jpg
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/media/2007/01/sch-u620-hands-on-2.jpg
what he's seeing and hearing etc.
A properly defined model - including my movie model - should include all
those things.
And BTW you HAVE to have something like a movie model - because you have to
acknowledge and then try to explain the UNITY of consciousness - the fact
that all the senses are integrated in that movie, and cannot be isolated.
[See Michael Tye]
This is a SCIENTIFIC approach to consciousness - a physically located
approach.
John: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's correct. The model of consciousness should be the self [brain-
body]
watching and physically interacting with the movie [that is in a sense
an
"open movie" - rather than on a closed screen - projected all over the
world
outside, and on the inside of the body]. The self is an integrated
brain-body unit, acting and responding with the whole body.
But you missed out the all-important part which I believe you're all
skipping over. What is your or anyone else's model of consciousness?
Which
model are you using? Or do you know anyone else using? Or do you not
have a
model?
You've been talking about "consciousness" - *what* have you been talking
about? Honestly?
Mike,
Just because you have movies and theatres and are experiencing a simuworld
in your mind rolling around in the sand feeling all warm and fuzzy doesn't
make it work. There are a few quantitative systems relationships that need
to be strictly defined in order to have a model that isn't just a bunch of
ideas slapped together that sound good to a philosophy student. The system
has to come together in such a way that it functions and operates like a
machine or a machine derivative so that you can actually build it within a
lifetime. There are consciousness patterns. And there are consciousness
inkblots.
John
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
