On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
> But there is something special about human consciousness. Think about
> it. Do you have any private awareness of the motion of the planets?
> Do you have any concerning the branching ratios for the various decays
> of the tau? Do you have any concerning human consciousness?
>
> The answer for me is no, no, yes. I have a reflexive self awarness.
> It may be possible
The same thing goes for a sophisticated AI.
> > I'd say that this latter viewpoint is a more scientific and
> > empirical one than the former. Do you disagree?
>
> Certainly. Both make assumptions about the unseen. Remember my
> definition concerning science? How does the assumption that a
> sufficiently complex computer has a reflexive self awareness add to
> our ability to model, predict the behavior of, or build computers?
Given the various levels of physics, complexity, and life, from atoms to
molecules, single-celled organisms, bacteria, fish, reptiles, apes, and
humans, why do you suppose that there is some new phenomenon occurring
only in humans?
Is seems much more reasonable to assume that the human is just a more
complex and useful arrangement of the atoms than anything else in the
world. But one that can be duplicated in other ways, for example, by a
sufficiently complex and powerful computer. The simplest explanation is
that we just haven't built powerful enough computers yet.
Why do we need some new, metaphysical phenomenon to explain it?
--
"Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.com/
