Just to throw a point of perspective into this conversation about mimicking qualia.
I posed a thematic question in my 1992 opus "Understanding the Integral Universe". "What of a single celled animus like an amoeba or paramecium? Does it 'feel' itself? Does it sense the subtle variations in its shape as it bumps around in its liquid world? Does it somehow note changes in water pressure around it? Is it always "hungry"? What drives a single celled creature to eat? What "need", if any is fulfilled? Is it due to an internal pressure gradient in it's chemical metabolism? Is there a resilience to its boundary that not only determines its particular shape, whether amoebic or firm, but that variations in that boundary re-distribute pressures through its form to create a range of responsive actions? And, because it is coherent for that life form, is "this" primal consciousness? How far down into the structure of existence can we reasonably extrapolate this? An atom's electron cloud responds and interacts with its level of environment, but is this consciousness? We cannot personify, and therefore mystify, all kinetic functions as different degrees of consciousness; at least not at this point. Neither, can we specify with any certainty a level where consciousness suddenly appears, where there was none before." "UIU"(c)ROSE 1992 ; 02)Intro section. <http://www.ceptualinstitute.com/uiu_plus/UIUcomplete11-99.htm> "Pain" is a net-collective qualia, an 'other-tier' cybernetic emerged phenomenon. But it is -not unrelated- to phenomena like basic EM field changes and 'system's experiences' in those precursive tiers. Also, "pain" (an aspect of -consciousness-), has to be understood in regard to the panorama of 'kinds-of-sentience' that any given system/organism has, embodies, utilizes or enacts. In other words, it would be wrong to dismiss the presence of 'pain' in autonomic nervous systems, simply because the cognitive nervous system is 'unaware' of the signals or the distress situation generating them. If one wants to 'define' pain sentience as a closed marker, and build contrived systems that match the defined conditions and criteria, that is one thing - and acceptable for what it is. But if the 'pain' is a coordination of generalized engagements and reactions, then a different set of design standards needs to be considered/met. Vis a vis -this- reasoning: <http://www.ceptualinstitute.com/uiu_plus/uiu04start.htm> Jamie Rose Ceptual Institute cognating on a sunday morning 2006/12/17 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---