On 6/14/2016 9:33 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Firstly, that assumes supervenience of consciousness on the brain
-- something that is not part of the definition of consciousness.
But one for which there is good evidence.
Sure, but is that part of the definition of consciousness?
I don't think he ever intended to define consciousness. He assumes
everyone knows what it is, i.e. ostensive definition.
Just pointing to a conscious person does not specify what
consciousness is, or its limits. Much less does it indicate that
consciousness is a kind of computation.
In this case ostensive definition means "pointing" to your own
consciousness. It's a Cartesian argument - if you don't know what
consciousness is then you don't know anything anyway. In any case it's
a common assumption among advocates of AI that it is a kind of
computation done by one's brain. There's an article in this month's
Skeptic magazine, in which Robert Kuhn collects and summarizes most of
the ideas about what consciousness is and whether it can be realized
artificially.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
