On 9/17/2011 1:33 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 16.09.2011 21:54 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/16/2011 12:19 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 9/15/2011 9:52 PM meekerdb said the following:
On 9/15/2011 12:20 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 9/15/2011 9:08 PM meekerdb said the following:
On 9/15/2011 11:40 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
I personally do not see a difference in this respect
between a cell, for example, and a robot. On my hierarchy
list

http://blog.rudnyi.ru/2011/01/perception-feedback-and-qualia.html





a bacteria is closer to a ballcock than a Big Dog. I would say that
Big Dog actually already even more advanced than a
bacteria.

Not until Big Dog can get it's own fuel and produce Little
Dogs.

Yes, but I have meant perception only. Well, one could say that
a bacteria perceives that it is time to divide and Big Dog
cannot perceive something like this. In my current world view
however "a bacteria divides" is closer to a ballcock that
closes the water. I mean that division of a bacteria is
probably based on some feedback mechanism as well.

Here though there is an interesting question. After all, one
can implement a PID controller with analog electronics, so this
way it is very close to a ballcock as well. Hence when I state
that Big Dog more advanced there is some contradiction indeed,
as finally it is just a collections of feedback mechanisms. Or
digital processing as such gives us something new as compared
with a ballcock?

Evgenii


Producing Little Dogs is not just a test of complexity.
Evolution teaches us that it is the fundamental source of all
value. An organism must value what aids growth and reproduction.
Organisms that don't cease to exist. We humans tend to lose sight
of this because culture provides so many layers to be
manipulated. But even language and reason may have evolved as a
way of talking your sweetheart into bed.

Brent


Well, first a small quote:

"For the good fit between conscious experience and outside reality,
 the idealist philosopher Berkley called in God. In this more
materialist age, it is Evolution that we must thank."

And now is the question. What is difference between "Evolution
teaches us" and "God teaches us"?

We know how evolutions works.

Brent


"Evolution by natural selection, for instance, which Charles Darwin originally conceived as a great theory, has lately come to function more as an antitheory, called upon to cover up embarrassing experimental shortcomings and legitimize findings that are at best questionable and at worst not even wrong. Your protein defies the laws of mass action? Evolution did it! Your complicated mess of chemical reaction turns into a chicken? Evolution! The human brain works on logical principles no computer can emulate? Evolution is the cause!"

R. B. Laughlin, Chapter 13 from A Different Universe (Principles of Life)


Laughlin can only criticize (mis) application of evolution because it is a well defined theory, i.e. we know how it works.

Brent

--
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to