On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> Hi John,
> On 20 Oct 2012, at 23:16, John Mikes wrote:
> Bruno,
> especially in my identification as "responding to relations".
> Now the "Self"? IT certainly refers to a more sophisticated level of
> thinking, more so than the average (animalic?)  mind. - OR: we have no
> idea. What WE call 'Self-Ccness' is definitely a human attribute because WE
> identify it that way. I never talked to a cauliflower to clarify whether
> she feels like having a self? (In cauliflowerese, of course).
> My feeling was first that all homeotherm animals have self-consciousness,
> as they have the ability to dream, easily realted to the ability to build a
> representation of one self. Then I have enlarged the spectrum up to some
> spiders and the octopi, just by reading a lot about them, looking video.
> But this is just a personal appreciation. For the plant, let us say I know
> nothing, although I supect possible consciousness, related to different
> scalings.
> The following theory seems to have consciousness, for different reason
> (the main one is that it is Turing Universal):
> x + 0 = x
> x + s(y) = s(x + y)
>  x *0 = 0
>  x*s(y) = x*y + x
> But once you add the very powerful induction axioms: which say that if a
> property F is true for zero, and preserved by the successor operation, then
> it is true for all natural numbers. That is the infinity of axioms:
> (F(0) & Ax(F(x) -> F(s(x))) -> AxF(x),
> with F(x) being any formula in the arithmetical language (and thus defined
> with "0, s, +, *),
> Then you get Löbianity, and this makes it as much conscious as you and me.
> Indeed, they got a rich theology about which they can develop maximal
> awareness, and even test it by comparing the physics retrievable by that
> theology, and the observation and inference on their most probable
> neighborhoods.
> Löbianity is the treshold at which any new axiom added will create and
> enlarge the machine ignorance. It is the utimate modesty treshold.

Might there be still other axioms (which we are not aware of, or at least
do not use) that could lead to even higher states of consciousness than we
presently have?

Also, it isn't quite clear to me how something needs to be added to Turing
universality to expand the capabilities of consciousness, if all
consciousness is the result of computation.



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