Brent: do you think we are that sure how to identify *intelligence and consciousness? *
*Intelligence (inter-lego)* * I identify from the linguistic origin (Latin) as READING BETWEEN THE (properly) EXPRESSED FEATURES - *to detect additional sense (maybe hidden so far). *Consciousness* is harder, principally as EVERYTHING being conscious of itself to some extent, identifying quantitative/qualitative (plus: so far unidentified)* relations,* acting/response domains and being sensitive to actions of ANYTHING else. Both are in line of agnosticism (not the theist/atheist kind, of course). I wonder if I come close to YOUR definitions? John Mikes On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2/20/2017 7:33 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 1:19 AM, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>> Dark Matter and Dark Energy remain complete mysteries. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As far as I can tell, what we have is a falsification of current >>>> theories. They appear to be good enough approximations for many >>>> things, but then they fail at predicting the expansion rate of the >>>> universe right? Maybe it's dark matter, maybe it's something else, >>>> >>> >>> They are 2 separate mysteries. Dark Matter is a mysterious something that >>> makes up 28% of the universe and holds galaxies and clusters of galaxies >>> together. Dark Energy is a even more mysterious something that makes up >>> 69% >>> of everything and causes the expansion of the entire universe to >>> accelerate. >>> And about 4% of the universe is made of the sort of normal matter and >>> energy >>> that until about 20 years ago was the only type we thought existed. >>> >>> There is a straightforward extension of General Relativity and Quantum >>> Mechanics that explains Dark Energy, however it gives a figure that is >>> 10^120 too large, it's been called the worse mismatch between theory and >>> observation in the entire history of science. I think it's fair to say we >>> really don't have a clue about Dark Energy, and Dark Matter is almost as >>> confusing. >>> >>> If science failed so far at explaining something, then it doesn't >>>> >>>> matter? >>>> >>> >>> Science has an explanation for consciousness that works beautifully, >>> consciousness is the way information feels when it is being processed >>> intelligently. >>> >> I know that your position is that information processing is >> nonsensical without matter. Many times you invited Bruno to compete >> with Intel, etc. So what you are saying is that "consciousness is the >> way matter feels when it participates in an intelligent computation". >> This "explanation" begs the question already. >> >> Then there's the issue of defining "processed intelligently". What >> does that even mean? Where do you draw the line between intelligent >> and non-intelligent processing? Let me guess: intelligent processing >> is the kind that generates consciousness. >> > > No, intelligent processing it that which leads to useful activity toward a > goal. That's why consciousness has to be consciousness OF a world in which > action is possible. It only exists in a context. > > For me, the interesting question is whether there can be intelligence > without consciousness, or more accurately can there be intelligence which > is conscious in a different way. We can see from Big Blue, Watson, and > deep neural nets that there can be intelligence based different kinds of > information processing. I suspect this means there would be different > kinds of consciousness associated with them - but how could we know and > what would it mean? John McCarthy warned many years ago that we should be > careful not to create robots that had general intelligence, lest we > inadvertently create conscious beings to whom we would have ethical > obligations. > > 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. > -- 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.
