On Jul 30, 5:44 pm, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > pain in their thigh?
> > The China brain can't simulate the interior sense of a neuron. It's
> > just a dynamic sculpture.
> So the only sturcture in the universe that can perceive are neurons or
> groups of neurons?

No, not at all. Everything perceives like what it is, not like a
neuron. With the internet, civilization may developing something like
a nervous system. Notice that we make and experience the memes. The
network itself, the switches and routers do not create or experience
memes. In the same way our lives are the shared experience of our
cells as well as our bodies, culture, etc.

 It has to be biochemical, using only certain atoms with
> certain numbers of electrons and protons.  However, if there are too many
> neurons (as in an entire brain) then these cannot be used as more primitive
> building blocks in a larger brain?

It can build a something larger, it just doesn't necessarily cohere as
a single entity, and if it did, it may not resemble ourselves.

> It seems you say the material matters,
> but only to a point.  Brains are made of the same exact materials of
> neurons, but a brain made out of a bunch of neurons will be conscious, yet a
> brain made out of a bunch of brains would not be conscious.  Here I must
> ask, is it really the material that makes the difference or is it the
> function?  If it is the function, and you make the brains functionally
> identical to individual neurons, then why won't the big brain (made up of
> many smaller brains) work?

The conjoined twins show that brains can be combined. It's the
material and the function.

> > No, Block is right. The China brain fails for the same reason as
> > inorganic materials fail. It's not the same thing.
> It is the same thing materially,

how do you figure? A human body is the same thing as a molecule in a

>and the same thing functionally.  The only
> difference is size.  Are giants and midgets somehow differently conscious
> from average-sized humans.
> > Fire can't be
> > simulated by water.
> This is propaganda.  It is meant to be short and convince people who don't
> give it much thought, but if one considers deeply the consequences of
> Church-Turing, they will find it to be false.

Church-Turing is false.

>  Explain why fire cannot be
> simulated by water?  

Because fire is a reaction which produces heat and light, and water
does not.

Show: What about fire cannot be simulated, and what
> prevents water from being used to construct a Turing machine.  I can imagine
> a sheet of ice in space, upon which snow balls can be placed in different
> configurations by big ice gears, all of which is powered by a water wheel
> driving a gigantic ice turbine.

Again, you're just bringing the assumptions of a flawed model to their
absurd conclusions. Not trying to criticize you personally, I'm just
saying it's plain that water cannot simulate fire. Your ice fire makes
no heat, consumes no fuel. It's just an image of a part of what fire
seems like to you. No more like fire than an oil rig is like a

> > My whole point in the Mickey Mouse anecdote is to
> > demonstrate clearly that no organization of human bodies is going to
> > generate it's own experience. You could have a trillion Chinas making
> > a Mickey Mouse move and act in silent movies, but without a human to
> > see it from the air, there is no movie, no Mickey.
> It sees itself, just as you can read your own thoughts without someone
> having to put you in an MRI and inspect them.

There is no it. It's only us who interpret the separate bodies as a
'group' or crowd. There may be some autopoetic potential at some
point, but we can't assume that is going to happen. Someone had the
observation that the number 10 billion seems to correspond with
quantum leaps of synergy.. we'll have to see if that turns out to be
true with human population.


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