> On 21 Mar 2018, at 20:39, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 3/21/2018 8:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 20 Mar 2018, at 00:56, Brent Meeker <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/19/2018 2:19 PM, John Clark wrote: >>>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Brent Meeker <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote >>>> >>>> > octopuses are fairly intelligent but their neural structure is >>>> > distributed very differently from mammals of similar intelligence. An >>>> > artificial intelligence that was not modeled on mammalian brain >>>> > structure might be intelligent but not conscious >>>> >>>> Maybe maybe maybe. A nd you don't have have the exact same brain >>>> structure as I have so you might be intelligent but not conscious. I said >>>> it before I'll say it again, consciousness theories are useless, and not >>>> just the ones on this list, all of them. >>> >>> You're the one who floated a theory of consciousness based on evolution. >>> I'm just pointing out that it only shows that consciousness exists in >>> humans for some evolutionarily selected purpose. It doesn't apply to >>> intelligence that arises in some other evolutionary branch or intelligence >>> like AI that doesn't evolve but is designed. >>> >> >> >> Not sure that there is a genuine difference between design and evolution. >> With the multicellular, there is an evolution of design. With the origin of >> life, there has been a design of evolution, even if serendipitously. I am >> not talking about some purposeful or intelligent design here. A cell is a >> quite sophisticated "gigantic nano-machine”. >> >> Then some technic in AI, like the genetic algorithm, or some technic >> inspired by the study of the immune system, or self-reference, leads to >> programs or machines evolving in some ways. >> >> Now, I can argue that for consciousness nothing of this is needed. It is the >> canonical knowledge associated with the fixed point of the embedding of the >> universal machines in the arithmetical reality. >> >> It differentiates into the many indexical first person scenarii. >> >> Matter should be what gives rise to possibilities ([]p & ~[]f, []p & <>t). >> That works as it is confirmed by QM without collapse, both intuitively >> through the many computations, and formally as the three material modes do >> provide a formal quantum logic, its arithmetical interpretation, and its >> metamathematical interpretations. >> >> The universal machine rich enough to prove their own universality (like the >> sound humans and Peano arithmetic, and ZF, …) are confronted to the >> distinction between knowing and proof. They prove their own incompleteness >> but still figure out some truth despite being non provable. >> >> The only mystery is where does the numbers (and/or the combinators, the >> lambda expressions, the game of life, c++, etc.) come from? >> But here the sound löbian machine can prove that it is impossible to derive >> a universal system from a non-universal theory. >> >> A weaker version of the Church-Turing-Post-Kleene thesis is: It exists a >> Universal Machine. That is, a Machine which computes all computable >> functions. The stronger usual version is that some formal system/definition >> provides such a universal machine, meaning that the class of the functions >> computable by some universal machine gives the class of all computable >> functions, including those not everywhere defined (and non algorithmically >> spared among those defined everywhere: the price of universality). >> >> That universal being has a rich theology, explaining the relation between >> believing, knowing, observing, feeling and the truth. > > That didn't address my question: Can you imagine different kinds of > consciousness. For example you have sometimes speculated that there is only > one consciousness which is somehow compartmentalized in individuals. That > implies that the compartmentalization could be eliminated and a different > kind of consciousness experienced...like the Borg.
Yes. With dissociative drugs, like Ketamine (dangerous) or salvia (much less dangerous but quite impressive) you do feel like reminding who you were before birth, and it is a quite altered state of consciousness, which is felt retrospectively as being totally out of time and space/ But you can have a glimpse of this each time you understand a theorem (even more so with a no-go theorem) in math. At first, I thought that salvia led to the experience of the Löbian entity, but eventually, it looks it is the universal Turing machine experience, before she get deluded in believing in the induction axioms. It is a dissociative non Löbian altered state of consciousness. I suspect we all go there each night, and the brain does a lot of work for us not reminding this (it would not help to motivate for the survival program). Bruno > > Brent > "We are the Dyslexic of Borg. Futility is persistent. Your ass will be > laminated.” >> >> Bruno >> >> >> >>> 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] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list >>> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>> <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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <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.
