On 3/8/2011 10:55 AM, 1Z wrote:

On Mar 8, 6:48 pm, Brent Meeker<meeke...@dslextreme.com>  wrote:
On 3/8/2011 9:36 AM, 1Z wrote:

On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meeker<meeke...@dslextreme.com>    wrote:
On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
Up to a point.  But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
   this world the BIV would no longer be able to process them.  We casually
   talk of "white rabbits" on this list, which are perfectly understandable
   things and are really of this world (e.g. in Walt Disney pictures).  But
   they are just tiny derivative, deviations from reality.  Even things as
   real as optical illusions become difficult to process (which is why they
   produce illusions).  If your BIV was a human brain and was provided the
   perceptions of, say, a bird it would probably be unable to process them
   - it would be as cut off as if you provided white noise.  My point is
   that human brains evolve and learn in this world and it's the only kind
   of world they can be conscious of.  You can fiddle a little with inputs
   to the BIV, but unless your inputs are just variants on this world,
   they'll mean nothing.
I think you can have gorss deviations from physics that are perfectly
easy to process
perceptually. In fact that is quite common in movie FX, games etc.
There is no
problem seeing a hovering rock.
We're using very different ideas of "gross deviations".  I'd say a
hovering rock is just a variation of this world: a variation that allows
us to identify the rock and hovering.
It's a good enough WR, especially if you see stuff that can't be
stitched into a single coherent alternative physics
I agree it's a WR.  But my point was that you can't have a consciousness
without a world to be conscious of.  And if you create that world in a
simulation or in for a BIV then either it's a familiar world, a variant
of ours, or, if it's unfamiliar, you won't know whether the BIV is
conscious or not because you won't know how to interpret the
interactions between the BIV and simulated world.
But if you know enough to write a consciousness programme,
then you know whether or not it is conscious.

I'm not assuming you know how to write a conscious program. I'm working from Bruno's idea that you can just substitute for a brain, at some level, and thereby have a conscious artifact.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to