On Aug 2, 5:26 pm, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > Craig's position seems to be more a blur than a point. He has said that > only biological neurons can instantiate consciousness
Consciousness is a qualitative estimation, all but useless for discussing the distinction between biological and non-biological interiority. It's an obsolete term as far as scientific examination goes. I say that human equivalent consciousness can probably only be instantiated by some form of biological neuron. Molecular level 'consciousness' is what is instantiated when you turn your computer on. The reason that your computer's awareness will not be able to be improved until it is a human equivalent is the same reason why only one class of molecules makes cells and one class of cells become neurons. If something very different could just as easily suffice, I think that it would be common to find alternate DNA based species, non- cellular animals, and non-neurological brains. > and only a > conscious being can act like a conscious being. 'Conscious' to me just means awareness of awareness, and it has no particular symptom that can be recognized through any category of acts. > That would imply that a > being with an artificial, e.g. silicon chip based, brain cannot act like > a conscious being. I've been repeating this over and over but nobody seems to recognize it. Whether or not something is deemed to be 'acting like a conscious being' just means that something resembles yourself in it's physical appearance and behavior enough that you infer it to have an interior environment similar to your own. It has little to do with whether or not arithmetic can be made to feel or believe something. That is what I am saying is a category error. > > A consciousness can no more be copied than the state of a QM system. > > That's the point in question. If Tegmark is right, it can. > Nah, Tegmark is wrong. Neurological signalling is just the tip of the iceberg. There is no actual physical phenomenon as a 'signal'. Anything can be a signal if it is interpretable as such. If brains could be generated independently of the cells and molecules they are made of, you would probably find some evidence of that in nature. A complex mineral that discusses semiotics or a planet that has figured out how to duplicate itself. Craig -- 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.
