Robert Swaine wrote:
Conciousness is akin to the phlogiston theory in chemistry. It is
likely a shadow concept, similar to how the bodily reactions make us
feel that the heart is the seat of emotions. Gladly, cardiologist
and heart surgeons do not look for a spirit, a soul, or kindness in
the heart muscle. The brain organ need not contain anything beyond
the means to effect physical behavior,.. and feedback as to those
behavior.
A finite degree of sensory awareness serves as a suitable replacement
for consciousness, in otherwords, just feedback.
Would it really make a difference if we were all biological machines,
and our perceptions were the same as other animals, or other
"designed" minds; more so if we were in a simulated existence. The
search for consciousness is a misleading (though not entirely
fruitless) path to AGI.
Well, with respect, it does sound as though you did not read the paper
itself, or any of the other books like Chalmers' "Conscious Mind".
I say this because there are lengthy (and standard) replies to the
points that you make, both in the paper and in the literature.
And, please don't misunderstand: this is not a "path to AGI". Just an
important side issue that the geneal public cares about enormously.
Richard Loosemore
--- On Fri, 11/14/08, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [agi] A paper
that actually does solve the problem of consciousness To:
[email protected] Date: Friday, November 14, 2008, 12:27 PM I
completed the first draft of a technical paper on consciousness the
other day. It is intended for the AGI-09 conference, and it can
be found at:
http://susaro.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/draft_consciousness_rpwl.pdf
The title is "Consciousness in Human and Machine: A Theory and Some
Falsifiable Predictions", and it does solve the problem, believe
it or not.
But I have no illusions: it will be misunderstood, at the very
least. I expect there will be plenty of people who argue that it
does not solve the problem, but I don't really care, because I
think history will eventually show that this is indeed the right
answer. It gives a satisfying answer to all the outstanding
questions and it feels right.
Oh, and it does make some testable predictions. Alas, we do not
yet have the technology to perform the tests yet, but the
predictions are on the table, anyhow.
In a longer version I would go into a lot more detail, introducing
the background material at more length, analyzing the other
proposals that have been made and fleshing out the technical
aspects along several dimensions. But the size limit for the
conference was 6 pages, so that was all I could cram in.
Richard Loosemore
------------------------------------------- agi Archives:
https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed:
https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your
Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox:
http://www.listbox.com
------------------------------------------- agi Archives:
https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed:
https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your
Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
