On 3/27/2018 3:59 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 3:56:18 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
On 3/27/2018 2:26 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 at 7:27 am, Brent Meeker <meek...@verizon.net
<javascript:>> wrote:
On 3/27/2018 10:19 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 at 1:50 am, Lawrence Crowell
<goldenfield...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 7:21:00 AM UTC-5, stathisp
wrote:
On 27 March 2018 at 09:35, Brent Meeker
<meek...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 3/26/2018 3:19 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
If you are not and never can be aware of it
then in what sense is it consciousness?
Depends on what you mean by "it". I can be
aware of my consciousness, without being aware
that it is different than it was before; just as
I can be aware of my consciousness without
knowing whether it is the same as yours, or the
same as some robot.
If I am given a brain implant to try out for a few
days and I notice no difference with the implant
(everything feels exactly the same if I switch it in
or out of circuit), everyone I know agrees there is
no change in me, and every test I do with the
implant switched in or out of circuit yields the
same results, then I think there would be no good
reason to hesitate in saying yes to the implant. If
the change it brings about is neither objectively
nor subjectively obvious, it isn't a change.
--
Stathis Papaioannou
This argument ignores scaling. With any network you can
replace or change nodes and connections on a small scale
and the system remains largely unchanged. At a certain
critical number of such changes the properties of the
entire network system can rapidly change.
Yes, it is possible that this is the case. What this would
mean is that that the observable behaviour of the system
would stay unchanged as it is replaced from 0 to 100% and so
would the consciousness for part of the way, but at a
certain point, when a particular neurone is replaced,
consciousness will suddenly flip on or off or change radically.
I think you are overstating that and creating a strawman.
Consciousness under the influence of drugs for example can
change radically, but not "suddenly flip" with one more
molecule of alcohol.
If part of your consciousness changes as your brain is gradually
replaced then you would notice but be aware noble to communicate
it, which is what it scproblematic. One way out of this would be
if your consciousness stayed the same up to a certain point then
suddenly flipped. If you suddenly became a zombie you would not
notice and not report that anything had changed, so no
inconsistency. However, it’s a long stretch to say that
consciousness will flip on changing a single molecule in order to
save the idea that it is substrate specific.
But LC wasn't arguing it was substrate specific. He was arguing
that its scale specific.
Brent
That was one argument. Also I am not arguing about the dosage of a
drug, but of some rewiring, removal or replacement of sub-networks.
As for substrate ponder the following question. If you had a stroke
and were given the option of either a silicon chip system to replace
neural functioning or neurons derived from your own stem cells, which
would you choose? The obvious choice would be neurons, for they would
most adapt to fill in needed function and interact with the rest of
the brain.
I think it very likely that a silicon neuron could work. But it would
work like a peg leg works. You could still get around, but it wouldn't
grow or self heal or tell you when it was hot or cold. Your brain can
actually grow new neurons and remove dead and non-functioning ones, and
respond to hormones. So I would expect that gradually replacing your
neurons with artificial neurons would gradually change how you
function. But maybe not in a way you could notice. For example, you
don't consciously notice hormone levels, so if you stopped responding to
them you wouldn't notice, and nobody else would either unless they were
monitoring hormone levels in your blood.
Brent
This whole idea of brain uploading has been rejected by
neurophysiologists. First off they are the most likely to be in the
real know about this subject. My theoretical objections are meant to
be grist in the mill; maybe they are real and related to the
neurophysiology or not. The short article did not go into details, but
it does not surprise me they threw up their hands in disbelief anyone
would seriously invest in this.
LC
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
