On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:27 AM, soulcatcher☠ <soulcatche...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Do you see the meaning of physical laws being somehow different from the
>> programmed laws that simulate an environment?
>>
> Yes, I feel that simulated mind is not identical to the real one.
> Simulation is only the extension of the mind - just a tool, a "mental
> crutch", a pluggable module that gives you additional abilities. For
> example, if I had the computation power of my brain sufficient enough, I
> could simulate other minds entirely in my mind (in imagination, whatever) -
> but these imaginary minds won't be conscious, will they?
>

I think that depends on the level of resolution to which you are simulating
them.  The people you see in your dreams aren't conscious, but if a super
intelligence could simulate another's mind to the resolution of their
neurons, I think those simulated persons would be conscious.



> In the other words:
> 1. I accept that computation is a description (the impretaive one) of
> reality, like math (declarative) or human language.
>

There is a difference between computation as a description (say a print out
or CD containing a program's source code) and the computation as an action
or process.  The CD wouldn't be conscious, but if you loaded it into a
computer and executed it, I think it would be.


> 2. I don't believe (for now)  that it has any meaning (and consciousness)
> per se.
>
>
>
So you think the software mind in a software environment would never
question the redness of red, when the robot brain would?

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to