Chickens can walk around for a while without a head also. It doesn't
mean that air is a viable substitute for a head, and it doesn't mean
that the head isn't producing a different quality of awareness than it
does under typical non-mortally wounded conditions.

On Jul 20, 9:09 am, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> >>So would the person dissociated from these images, or feeling them
> >>meaningless or unlreal, etc., ever report these different feelings?
> >>Remember, nerves control movement of the vocal cords, if the neural network
> >>was unaffected and its operation remained the same all outwardly visible
> >>behavior would also be the same.  The person could not report any
> >>differences with their sense of vision, nor would other parts of their brain
> >>(such as those of thought, or introspection, etc.) have any indication that
> >>the nerves in the visual cortex has been modified (so long as they continued
> >>to send the right signals at the right times).
>
> > I'm saying that without DNA in the neurons, or something which
> > functions exactly as DNA, it may not be possible to satisfy the given
> > that the neural network is unaffected. It's all a matter of what the
> > substitution level is. If you replaced water with heavy water, it's
> > not exactly the same thing. If you have something that acts like water
> > in all ways, it's nothing but water. If you have a brain made of
> > neurons that are not neurons, you have something other than a brain to
> > one degree or another, depending on the exact difference. If you are
> > stating as a given that there is no difference between the replacement
> > brain from a biological brain, then the replacement brain is nothing
> > but a biological brain.
>
> The requirement is that the artificial neurons interact with the
> biological neurons in the normal way, so that the biological neurons
> can't tell that they are imposters. This is a less stringent
> requirement than making artificial neurons that are indistinguishable
> from biological neurons under any test whatsoever. In the example I
> gave before, removing the DNA from a neuron would at least for a few
> minutes continue behaving normally so the surrounding neurons would
> not detect that anything had changed, whereas an electron micrograph
> might easily show the difference.
>
> -- Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 
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