Hi Bruno Marchal 

Obviously, my statement wasn't very clear.

All living things can sense their environments. 
Plants turn themselves sometimes to the light
and know night from day. I don't know
if they have the sensation of light, which is
a clear indication of what is produced in the 
mind by consciousness. To the degree that 
a plant can do that would be how conscious it is.
I would say that a plant's consciousness
would be more like the "consciousness" we have
when we dream. But that's just a speculation.
 



Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
10/20/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 


----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: Bruno Marchal 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-10-18, 10:39:33 
Subject: Re: Continuous Game of Life 


On 17 Oct 2012, at 19:19, Roger Clough wrote: 

> Hi Bruno Marchal 
> 
> IMHO all life must have some degree of consciousness 
> or it cannot perceive its environment. 

Are you sure? 

Would you say that the plants are conscious? I do think so, but I am 
not sure they have self-consciousness. 

Self-consciousness accelerates the information treatment, and might 
come from the need of this for the self-movie living creature having 
some important mass. 

"all life" is a very fuzzy notion. 

Bruno 






> 
> 
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
> 10/17/2012 
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 
> 
> 
> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
> From: Bruno Marchal 
> Receiver: everything-list 
> Time: 2012-10-17, 10:13:37 
> Subject: Re: Continuous Game of Life 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:37, John Clark wrote: 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:40 PM, meekerdb wrote: 
> 
> 
>>> If consciousness doesn't do anything then Evolution can't see it, 
>>> so how and why did Evolution produce it? The fact that you have no 
>>> answer to this means your ideas are fatally flawed. 
> 
>> I don't see this as a *fatal* flaw. Evolution, as you've noted, is 
>> not a paradigm of efficient design. Consciousness might just be a 
>> side-effect 
> 
> But that's exactly what I've been saying for months, unless Darwin 
> was dead wrong consciousness must be a side effect of intelligence, 
> so a intelligent computer must be a conscious computer. And I don't 
> think Darwin was dead wrong. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darwin does not need to be wrong. Consciousness role can be deeper, 
> in the "evolution/selection" of the laws of physics from the 
> coherent dreams (computations from the 1p view) in arithmetic. 
> 
> 
> Bruno 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 
> 
> -- 
> 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 
> . 
> 

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 



-- 
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.

-- 
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