On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 07:23:10PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > On 11 May 2015, at 07:09, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Perhaps one way of looking at it that makes it more intuitive is > > >that a mirror implements a recording and playback aparatus. The > > >farther away it is, the more delayed the playback. But few would > > >attribute consciousness to their reflection. > > > > Nice point. > > > > Bruno > > > > A not particularly relevant point, I would think. A reflection such as > that Jason described is not a faithful recording of brain processes. I > don't believe anybody is proposing that the flickering image of > Humphrey Bogart in CasaBlanca is conscious. > > Again - the sorts of recordings being discussed are something like an > EEG recording of every neuron in a brain. I still don't think our > intuition can cope with that. The recording needs to be sufficiently > faithful to the original such that playback is physically > indistinguishable from the original process. And need I mention the Z > word at this point. > But what if the brain's operation is entirely visible? Like a 2d circuit board where and logic gates and memory states are macroscopically visible? Or like those nematodes which are transparent and have had genetic manipulation to make their neurons emit light when activated? http://www.wired.com/2011/12/optical-neuron-firing/ Jason -- 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.
