Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Bruce Kellett
So you think that Darwinian evolution produced intelligent zombies,
and then computationalism infused consciousness?
No. What I am saying is that consciousness is not a plausible target for
gradual evolution for the following reasons:
1) There is no evolutionary advantage to it, intelligent zombies could
do equally well. Every single behaviour that each one of us has, as seen
for the outside, could be performed by intelligent zombies;
Do you find it an advantage to be conscious in your everyday life? Do
you really think that your partner and/or children are zombies?
2) There is no known mechanism of conscious generation that can be
climbed. For example, we understand how neurons are computational units,
how connecting neurons creates a computer, how more neurons and more
connections create a more powerful computer and so on. Evolution can
climb this stuff. There is no equivalent known mechanism for consciousness.
This is the tired old creationist crap saying that the eye is too
complicated to be explained by evolution; the bacterium's flagellum is
too complicated...; the ...... is too complicated .....
At bottom, it is just an argument from ignorance. You do not happen to
know a mechanism whereby consciousness could develop from simpler forms.
But that does not in any way mean that such is not possible. Creationist
anti-intellectualism yet again....
I don't know if intelligent zombies are possible. Maybe consciousness
necessarily supervenes on the stuff necessary for that level of
intelligence. But who knows where consciousness stops supervening? Maybe
stuff that is not biologically evolved is already conscious. Maybe stars
are conscious. Who knows? How could we know?
What we can know, by scientific investigation, is that all known life
forms evolved from simpler forms by processes generally described under
the heading of Darwinian evolution. Consciousness is a feature of many
living creatures. If you want to argue that consciousness is something
outside the normal evolutionary process, then you have embraced an
irreducibly dualist position.
I can see that computationalism might well have difficulties
accommodating a gradual evolutionary understanding of almost anything --
after all, the dovetailer is there in Platonia before anything physical
ever appears. So how can consciousness evolve gradually?
This, it seems to me, is just another strike against comp -- it does not
fit with the scientific data.
Bruce
--
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.
