On Oct 11, 2:52 am, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: > 2011/10/11 Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 10, 10:32 am, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2011/10/10 Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> > > > > > No. Your claim is that all inputs must also be neurological. > > > > He *never* said that. What he said is this : "If you know the input + the > > > working of a neuron, you can predict the output (fire or not fire), the > > > input can be from adjacent neurons or from nerves which are link to the > > > external environment via sensors." You are the one keeping on claiming > > that > > > the model must predict the external environment and that is non-sensical. > > > Adjacent neurons = neurological. > > Nerves = neurological. > > Sensors = neurological. > > > His claim excludes internal spontaneous causes. I'm just pointing out > > that neurological outputs cannot be predicted without them and that > > those cannot be determined from the physiology and the environment > > alone. You have to know what the brain is feeling to predict > > everything that the neurons that make it up are going to do. > > You have to know the transition rule(s) of the neuron. Transition rule(s) + > input = output.
The idea of transition rules is not appropriate to describe the phenomenology. It collapses the sensorimotive capacity into an a hollow arithmetic silhouette, which has no place in a living organism. Computer programs have transition rules, cells have conditioned responses and learned behaviors. > > Input == Internal state of the neuron + environment state where the neuron > is (adjacent cells, nerves signal, chemical environment, ...) > > You don't have to know what the brain is feeling as a whole... because the > neuron does not. You *do* have to know what the brain is feeling as a whole, because even though the neuron does not know what the brain is feeling in the brain's terms, it participates in the collective pattern of charge in the brain which is the 3-p shadow of a person's subjectivity. The neuron feels a local recapitulation of the overall state of the neurological collective, specific to it's particular role and capacity. It's on a need to know basis, just as we are in our own levels of consciousness, subconsciousness, and unconsciousness, but it must know something, otherwise nothing knows anything. Without knowing the feeling in it's native subjective terms, it would be like trying to predict animated Rorschach inkblots. Sort of like technical analysis of the stock market - a death spiral of self- similarity feedback which takes us further from the signifying fundamentals we care about and deeper into the quicksand of a- signifying quantitative fantasy. 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.
