________________________________
From: John Clark <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: AI Dooms Us
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
<[email protected]> wrote:
>a human baby is a plastic template for the individual to emerge in
And those 1000 lines of Lisp are a plastic template for the Jupiter Brain to
emerge in.
> All of that living experience and cultural learning is not contained inside
> that DNA bundle.
Obviously. And everything the adult Jupiter Brain knows wasn't contained in
those 1000 lines of Lisp, but that was the seed that got things going.
> I disagree with your conclusion that epigenetic effects are of minor
> consequence.
Are you saying that random environmental conditions in the womb are necessary
to build a brain? I don't see how that could work but a machine has just as
much access to the environment as a fetus. Or are you saying the conditions are
not random at all but planned and deliberate? Well, I don't believe in God.
> The very rapid unfolding sequence of DNA choreographed events that occurs
> during embryogenesis will unfold in a different manner in each instance.
>
>>DNA doesn't fold or unfold, the most it does is during reproduction when it
>>temporally turns from a double helix to 2 single helices which soon turn into
>>2 double helices.
The process of embryogenesis unfolds. It is the sequence of gene expression
that unfolds. It is a dynamic unfolding process. You are confusing the
container -- e.g. the DNA itself -- with the dynamic process that occurs inside
the living nucleus of a cell and within the rapidly developing organism during
embryogenesis. The process is very much unfolding.
It's protein that's the champion folder and the same sequence of amino acids
always fold into the same shape under all lifelike conditions; it's a good
thing too because if the way proteins wasn't consistent and reliable life would
be impossible.
> It is an extra mechanism that works hand I hand with DNA switching
> expression on and off… selecting from alternate exressions.
>
>>Yes, but computer code has been doing that, switching subroutines on and off,
>>for more than 60 years. Tell me something of fundamental importance that
>>meat can do but silicon can't.
Yes.. and so... What's your point? Are you changing the meat [pun intended] of
the discussion midstream? Whether or not switching analogs exist in computer
code is irrelevant to the point I was making that ultimate genetic expression
-- measured say by the mRNA produced or the proteins that result -- is itself
a dynamic variable process that is influenced by factors outside of the DNA
bundle itself.
> how these regions finally get transcribed into mRNA, in what is a highly
> dynamic process
>>And when a Lisp program gets run it's a a highly dynamic process. Tell me
>>something of fundamental importance that meat can do but silicon can't.
That was not the discussion I thought we were having. A few things however off
the top of my head that separate -- at least so far -- silicon from biology:
Life is self (or auto)- catalyzing; computers (both the hardware and the
software) need to be generated by an external agent -- i.e. the software
engineer, the chip fab plants etc. They need to be assembled, configured,
deployed, and operated.
Life is far more energy efficient than silicon, by many orders of magnitude.
Life can either synthesize or knows how to find all of the resources it
requires for existence. Computers need to be plugged in.
And so on and so forth....
>> So the key to consciousness and the factor that determines our personal
>> identity lies in our poo? > If you want to characterize your digestive
>> process by what is defecated out as waste I think you must not have a good
>> grasp of what the digestive process is all about. It is our primary
>> interface with the external world. It is the interface where we absorb the
>> external world into our bodies internal world. It even has its own tiny
>> frontline brain – the enteric nervous system.
So I guess the answer to my question is yes.
I have no idea what you are talking about. You are trying to characterize what
I said -- which is that the flora and fauna living in our guts can influence
our thoughts and mood -- as being equivalent to stating that our consciousness
is controlled therefore by these organisms. Let's be perfectly clear I never
said that John, and you know I never said that. Me thinks you are just being
argumentative.
>>> It affects out well-being
>>> So would an inflamed toenail, but I don't think a investigation of that
>>> affliction will bring much enlightenment on the nature of intelligence or
>>> consciousness.
> > Apples and oranges
>>are both trees.
And a common expression with a well known meaning that is understood by 99% of
US English speakers as well
> Just because one tool – reductionism has had spectacular success in
> increasing our understanding (and I am not denying that it has) does not mean
> that it is always the appropriate tool to use for the job.
Reductionism may not always work but holism NEVER works.
Systems approaches do work and are used all the time. I find it amusing that
you would say otherwise, when it is so ubiquitous.
-Chris
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/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.
