On Monday, February 24, 2014 9:21:15 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote:
>
> On 24 February 2014 13:56, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
> Sure, but there is a difference between restoring damaged parts of a 
>> living person's brain and putting parts synthetic brain parts and expecting 
>> it to become a living person.
>
>
> I think we need to examine that assumption of difference more closely. 
> ISTM that, if you can replace or restore any part of a living person's 
> brain, that is in any significant way involved in consciousness, with a 
> functional equivalent, this must directly contradict any contention that 
> function cannot emulate consciousness. How could one escape that conclusion?
>

Easily. If there is a reflection of the sun coming off a puddle of water, 
and you can see that reflection on the wall as an interplay of light and 
shadow, you can analyze that reflection mathematically and then recreate 
the pattern of light using any number of methods (photography, lasers, 
lenses and mirrors, etc). It can be demonstrated conclusively that dropping 
a pebble in the puddle changes the reflection on the wall in the same way 
that adding a mathematical description of a dropped pebble will change the 
synthetic projection on the wall.

Why then can't we say that lenses or photography create water?

Well, if we didn't know for a fact that the only the original pattern is 
related to something we call water and the sun, then we could say - we 
would have to say that logically lenses do create water, and that water can 
only be an image.

Since we cannot deny our own experience, except by using our capacity to 
understand and represent some aspect of our experience to logically 
abstract a concept of experiential absence, then we should realize that 
there is no possibility for any description within consciousness (such as 
brains encountered by our body's examination of other bodies) to supersede 
consciousness itself. Any mathematical description of what our brain does 
or what our mind thinks that it does will always be superseded and 
diagonalized by awareness itself. It's not a higher dimension, it is the 
container of dimensionality itself.

Craig


> David
>
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to