On 21 Aug 2014, at 01:45, meekerdb wrote:
...awareness: JM's response to relations. This is very low level, like my
thermostat is aware of the temperature because it has a specific response
to it in service of a goal.
self-awareness: Having an interior mental model in which self is
represented alongside other 3p elements of the model, i.e. my koi know
where they are in the pond.
consciousness: Creating a narrative account of events for memory and
calling up those memories in developing "responses to relations".
self-consciousness: Reflective awareness of consciousness, i.e. attributing
thought and intention to the 3p model of one's self.
Dunno if those are useful, but they seem to me to be a kind of hierarchy of
consciousness ...
So that "SELF" makes all the difference. Any ID for it?
BTW the thermostat is not aware - it responds to the setting
relation.
Then there is the overvaluation of the "3p" - our (so-far composed) VIEW
in/of our world-view. Your koi 'know' that pond.
I am not sure about "my-self" either: I think I include certain attributes
etc. but restricted to those elements (items?) we already have included
into our inventory.
(Could Bruno detail a complete inventory of a Loebian machine?)
How do we store recallable memories, to be used in actual *brain(*function)?
(please spare me from the childish protein-etc. alleged conformational
codes which have to be recalled first in order to 'save', 'recall' and
apply).
How do we have any mentality that reflects into the output of our
*brain*(function)
(what I call the tool for such)?
John M
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:40 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8/21/2014 1:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 21 Aug 2014, at 01:45, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 8/20/2014 2:20 PM, John Mikes wrote:
>
> Brent: why should "spiders" (etc.) be 'not conscious'?
>
>
> I think they are, in a way. But if I were pitching the idea of uploading
> someone's mother into a virtual reality and warranting that said virtual
> mother would be conscious, I don't think I'd mention that the concept of
> "conscious" was elastic enough to include spiders.
>
>
> BTW what is your take on "conscious"? I have no idea myself, because I
> consider "everything" an 'observer' that tackles info about anything - and
> the brainfunction(?) invoked by many for conscious processes lacks the
> connection in our present scintific catasters (measurements?) to topical
> contents (distinctions).
> When I have to speak about 'consciousness' I have a different meaning in
> mind from 'being conscious' (an elusive term).
> Ccness means in my vocabulary the 'response to relations'. A process.
>
>
> I tried to distinguish that, which I called "awarness" from
> "self-awarness". Maybe I should lay out my idea of these levels of
> consciousness, not claiming they have some metaphysical significance, just
> terminology:
>
> awareness: JM's response to relations. This is very low level, like my
> thermostat is aware of the temperature because it has a specific response
> to it in service of a goal.
>
> self-awareness: Having an interior mental model in which self is
> represented alongside other 3p elements of the model, i.e. my koi know
> where they are in the pond.
>
> consciousness: Creating a narrative account of events for memory and
> calling up those memories in developing "responses to relations".
>
> self-consciousness: Reflective awareness of consciousness, i.e.
> attributing thought and intention to the 3p model of one's self.
>
> Dunno if those are useful, but they seem to me to be a kind of hierarchy
> of consciousness that is more descriptive and finer than Bruno's "any
> universal Turing machine".
>
>
> Are you kidding me or what?
>
> We have the raw consciousness for *all* universal machine, yes, then we
> nhave self-consciousness for the Löbian machines, which are much more than
> universal machine, then we have the 8 internal views, and all the
> refinement between belief, knowledge, observation, feeling, all being
> themselves nuanced by the G and G* separation, and all this in a testable
> (and tested ) way, thanks to the observation part.
>
>
> But, as I understand it, those computational based categories make no
> distinction between the jumping spider (what do you have against web
> spiders?) the dog and me in terms of consciousness. We all have feelings,
> knoweldge, make observations. But I think there are other qualitative
> differences as I said above.
>
> Brent
>
>
>
> Then the differences which remain are the difference between the
> particular "[]" (PA, ZF, you, me, ...).
>
> The difference between consciousness and awareness is a bit 1004 in this
> thread.
>
> Bruno
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
--
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.
