On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Stephen P. King <[email protected]> wrote:
>> If there is a top-down effect of the mind on the atoms then there we >> would expect some scientific evidence of this. Evidence would >> constitute, for example, neurons firing when measurements of >> transmembrane potentials, ion concentrations etc. suggest that they >> should not. You claim that such anomalous behaviour of neurons and >> other cells due to consciousness is widespread, yet it has never been >> experimentally observed. Why? > > > Hi Stathis, > > How would you set up the experiment? How do you control for an effect > that may well be ubiquitous? Did you somehow miss the point that > consciousness can only be observed in 1p? Why are you so insistent on a 3p > of it? A top-down effect of consciousness on matter could be inferred if miraculous events were observed in neurophysiology research. The consciousness itself cannot be directly observed. >> I don't mean putting an extra module into the brain, I mean putting >> the brain directly into the same configuration it is put into by >> learning the language in the normal way. > > > How might we do that? Alter 1 neuron and you might not have the same > mind. When you learn something, your brain physically changes. After a year studying Chinese it goes from configuration SPK-E to configuration SPK-E+C. If your brain were put directly into configuration SPK-E+C then you would know Chinese and have a false memory of the year of learning it. >> In a thought experiment we can say that the imitation stimulates the >> surrounding neurons in the same way as the original. We can even say >> that it does this miraculously. Would such a device *necessarily* >> replicate the consciousness along with the neural impulses, or could >> the two be separated? > > > Is the brain strictly a classical system? No, although the consensus appears to be that quantum effects are not significant in its functioning. In any case, this does not invalidate functionalism. >> As I said, technical problems with computers are not relevant to the >> argument. The implant is just a device that has the correct timing of >> neural impulses. Would it necessarily preserve consciousness? >> >> > Let's see. If I ingest psychoactive substances, there is a 1p observable > effect.... Is this a circumstance that is different in kind from that > device? The psychoactive substances cause a physical change in your brain and thereby also a psychological change. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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.
