On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain that
allows you to say "I know"?
I'm just guessing but maybe the Neocortex because it's the biggest
anatomical difference between a cat's brain and mine. But I do
know one thing for certain, whatever part it is if it evolved then
it effects behavior; and if it effects behavior then the Turing
Test works for consciousness and not just intelligence.
John K Clark
Are you saying that there is no consciousness without intelligence?
I believe (up to here at least) consciousness can exist
minus intelligence.
Also, many things going on in the brain affect behaviour without
necessarily having any impact on consciousness at all.
I don't think the ability to say "I know (or believe) I am awake"
has anything to do with intelligence. But it does require
consciousness (even if asleep and dreaming that you said that.)
What I am driving at is that it is vaguely impossible to understand
anything 1p in a 3p manner.
I think that is based on an unexamined idea of "understand".
Suppose I could monitor your brain with a super-fMRI and after long
experimentation and mapping I could 'see' every thought, including
distinguishing which were conscious and which weren't. And suppose
using this information I could create a functional model of your
brain so that given the various inputs and environmental effects, I
could predict exactly what you would think, at least a few minutes
in advance. And further, using this knowledge, I could use
electrostimulation to cause you to have specific thoughts. And
having attained this level of knowledge of many human brains, I can
now make brains to order having various characteristics: musical
ability, empathy, humor,...
Now you will say I have not understood anything 1p (in fact my model
predicts you will), but I would reply, "OK, what else is there to
understand?"
The difference between being the one knowing that he is in Washington
and believing that he has a copy in Moscow with being the one knowing
that he is in Moscow and believing that he has a copy in Washington.
Once you take it into account you can, by some work, understand that
such a "soul", subject, person, is not that easily related to a
physical process. With comp, it is automatically related with
infinitely computations, and that leads to interesting problems in
math suggestion new ways to conceive the things rationally.
You miss, and perhaps David's too (?), the fact that above a threshold
of relative complexity, the lower level is not relevant for the
description of the higher level. It would be like asking "why Obama
has been elected?", and getting back the answer: everything followed
the SWE.
Then you miss the *key* thing (well for those interested in the mind-
body problem) that many people miss it; but not David. Nor the
Ancients. It the mode of the subject, the hero behind the mask. Who is
he?
The "modern" seems to want to eliminate it.
Thanks to incompleteness, machines already get refractory to that
elimination, and known the 1p-3p difference.
Here, it is that once you take the higher level description into
account, with their relative independence, you have also to take into
account their mode of relation with themselves and truth and
possibilities. As neither p, nor <>p follows from []p, by
incompleteness, important nuances follows in the way the machine can
explore the arithmetical reality.
It is non trivial and interesting because it reduces a part of the
mind-body problem into a "belief in body" problem, which can be
translated into arithmetic, and tested empirically. If that does not
match, classical comp is false.
We can also compare the introspective discourse of the ideally correct
universal machine about it and It self, and Self, with the very
diverse humans theologies. The universal machine seems to agree with
Lao-tseu that the wise stay mute. (making that task not so easy, how
to interview a mute machine?). Comp provides G, *and* G* to solve that
problem.
Bruno
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
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/d/optout.
