On 16.08.2011 16:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 15 Aug 2011, at 19:53, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 15.08.2011 19:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 14 Aug 2011, at 21:25, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Let me put it this way. I guess that a Lobian machine could be
implemented, or it has been already implemented. So let us
then take some Lobian machine and then you demonstrate
practically that such a machine is conscious. Then it would
much easier to understand what you mean.
I don't think we can demonstrate technically that anything is
conscious. If someone did this for anything, he would have solve
the mind body problem.
It is generally accepted that we cannot prove our own
consciousness (we can know our own, here and now, but we cannot
provide a proof for that). It is accepted that we cannot prove
that something is conscious.
Well, let me quote Jeffrey Gray
p. 18. “Philosophers sometimes endow conscious experience with an
inviolable privacy, rendering it incapable of meeting the
scientific requirement for replicability of empirical observations.
Nothing could be further from the truth, as attested by the
reliability of visual illusions, among many other phenomena.”
p. 135. "These experiments demonstrate yet again, by the way, that
the 'privacy' of conscious experience offers no barrier to good
science. Synaesthetes claim a form of experience that is, from the
point of view of most people, idiosyncratic in the extreme. Yet it
can be successfully brought into the laboratory."
He seems to disagree with you. Hence, as I have said, your meaning
of "conscious" seems to be different from his meaning.
There is no disagreement at all. I was saying that we cannot prove
that an entity is conscious. I was not saying that many feature of
consciousness and privacy, like qualia, are not amenable to a
scientific study, theoretical and experimental. Gray is aware of the
hard problem, so I doubt very much he would pretend to be able to
prove that something is conscious. But that is very different of
saying that a scientific approach of consciousness is not possible.
The privacy of consciousness can be used as a scientific axiom for
studying it, for example.
If there are no disagreement, that it would nice to look at the
practical study of a Lobian machine (similar to Jeffrey Gray's
research). Why not? By the way, are there robots implementing the Lobian
logic already available? Or this is still a pure theory?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at