On 8/17/2011 1:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:09 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>  wrote:
On 8/17/2011 5:41 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

There is no such thing as a functionally identical part that
is not the genuine part. Any substitution potentially affects qualia,
to what degree depends on the degree in isomorphism of the substitute,
both logically and materially.
This seems to be the crux of the argument: How close is close enough to
be *functionally* identical. Craig seems to think it is somewhere in the
neighborhood of one neuron might be substituted for another (from the
same person? same species?).
My guess is that you'd need a stem cell from a mammal. I would imagine
that tissue transplants from human brains have already been attempted
and failed. Think of it like a nation. If a baby is adopted into the
US, he becomes an American. If she is transplanted from Italy as an
adult, she is more of an Italian-American culturally. The transplanted
neuron would likely have to learn the culture of that nervous system.

Stathis thinks that the relevant
functionality is just identical input/ouput at the synapses, which could
be realized by a silicon/plastic/... artificial neuron.  I'm closer to
Stathis opinion.
To continue the metaphor, that's like having an automatic car that
knows how to drive on the roads and has a legal license plate being
considered an American.

No it is not. I wish you'd stop generating these phony analogies. An car that knows how to drive on the roads is very far from having the same input/output as an American.

It's not clear whether Craig thinks that his spirit/free-will/sense
would be able to act on an artificial neuron and cause it to deviate
from strict physical determinism or not.
My guess is that the artificial neuron makes it's own sense,

But, according to you, doesn't every natural neuron also make it's own sense? But somehow it's is amenable to control by your will/spirit/sense - it doesn't just follow the laws of physics and chemistry.

it's just
too primitive for what we would call free-will or feeling. It's more
detection/reaction. It would be unable to fully contribute in the
animal or human level sensorimotives of the brain,

But it could if it were a mammalian neuron? How does it contribute, over and above it's synaptically identical interface?


but it could
facilitate dumb connections between organic neurons.


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