On Jul 31, 7:07 am, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > The China brain can't simulate the interior sense of a neuron. It's > > just a dynamic sculpture. > > Maybe the same is true of brains. Just because something behaves as if > it has feelings and understanding doesn't mean that it really has > feelings and understanding. Besides, the very notion that a > carbon-based construct could be conscious is clearly ridiculous! > > http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaFZTAOb7IE
Nice. You're making my point though. We would have no clue that our brains could think by the exterior behavior of the neurons it's made of. It's only because we are our brains that we know it is the case that groups of neurons do think and feel. Therefore, designing something based upon only what our brain appears to us to be doing (not much... just another interesting organ in the body doing it's cell/organ things) doesn't mean that the thinking and feeling is going to show up by itself. If we could modify our own minds first to be able to see and feel the thoughts and feelings of another brain, then we would be more likely to be able to tell whether we were on the right track in designing a deep AGI. Without that sense, we're like blind people comparing the beauty of the pictures we've painted - insisting that if it feels like the Mona Lisa to touch then there's no reason why it couldn't look exactly like the Mona Lisa. You need the right brushstrokes, definitely, but if you can't see the color of the paint and do it all in black it doesn't much matter. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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.
