On 07 Dec 2013, at 19:26, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Roger Clough <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Materialistic theories of consciousness can only describe
experience, not deal with experience itself.
Consciousness theories are a dime a dozen and materialistic theories
explain consciousness every bit as well as non-materialist theories.
Materialist theories use an identity thesis which is non intelligible
with the computationalist theory of mind. In fact, materiaslist use
mechanism in a non consistent way.
Also, what is matter? A primitive in the assumption? A convenient
fiction? Matter has its hard problem of its own, and non materialist
theories suggests that the illusion of matter can have a rational
explanation in term of computations coherence.
And in the vastly more difficult matter of coming up with intelligence
Intelligence is very simple. Competence is hard, and has a negative
feedback on intelligence (as illustrated by all civilisations, I think).
A machine is intelligent if that machine is not stupid.
And there are two kind of stupid machines:
- those which believe/assert that they are intelligent,
- those which believe/assert that they are stupid.
Exercice: show that Dt satisfy this for correct (or just consistent
actually) machine.
theories materialists are far better and keep getting better every
year, while non-materialist try to peddle the exact same useless
religious crap they have for millennium. So why do otherwise smart
people believe in this non-materialist claptrap?
My parents were atheists, and I have never bought the (weak)
materialist crap. Computationalism explains well why such matter is
more plausibly a myth than a fundamental fact.
One reason and one reason only, their mommy and daddy told them it
was true when they were still pooping in their pants.
You might believe in primitive matter for similar reason. Nobody has
ever seen that, it explains nothing about intelligence, consciousness
and also on the matter appearance. Matter is a failed hypothesis, I
would say. I am agnostic, but with comp, I explain that "Matter" makes
no sense at all. It is the ether that we don't need in any comp TOE
(and weak-comp TOE).
Matter as primitive is a natural extrapolation from the observation,
but which either eliminates the person and consciousness since 1500
years, or lead to absurd unintelligible dualist theories of mind/matter.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
