Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 6:08 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 5:44:40 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: On 10/17/2012 4:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: I meant that awareness is not emulable outside of awareness. You can't make something which pretends to itself that i

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 5:44:40 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 10/17/2012 4:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > I meant that awareness is not emulable outside of awareness. You can't > make something which pretends to itself that it is experiencing something. > Once you have 1

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 07:19:09PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Oct 2012, at 08:07, Russell Standish wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:39:18PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> > >>On 14 Oct 2012, at 23:27, Russell Standish wrote: > >>>So any self-organised system should be called al

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 4:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: I meant that awareness is not emulable outside of awareness. You can't make something which pretends to itself that it is experiencing something. Once you have 1p awareness though, sure, you can re-present and meta-represent all kinds of awareness wi

Re: Why self-organization programs cannot be alive

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 06:54:31AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Russell Standish > > Creating structure out of a random environment > requires intelligence, the ability to make choices > on one's own. Self-organization does not have > that capacity, it merely follows a computer program. > So

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On 10/17/2012 1:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Oct 2012, at 08:52, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/17/2012 2:07 AM, Russell Standish wrote: >The self is directly related to the Dx = "xx" trick, for me. The Dx=xx trick is about self-replication. Of course entities with a sense of the self/ot

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:56:26 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 10/17/2012 12:38 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:11:00 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:42, Stephen P. King wrote: >> > It is the inability of com

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On 10/17/2012 1:19 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Oct 2012, at 08:07, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:39:18PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Oct 2012, at 23:27, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:44:11PM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: "Computational Autop

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 12:38 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:11:00 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:42, Stephen P. King wrote: > It is the inability of comp to solve the arithmetic body problem > that is its Achilles heel. No. It is the

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" ratherthan"is"

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:54:35 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > > while most people are content to accept that these [physical] 'laws' >> simply 'are', I am more inclined to question what exactly we mean by that. >> > >

Re: The meanings of Peirce's three OBJECTIVE Categories

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:24:20 PM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > Actually, I may be accused of subtly altering the meanings of > Peirce's categories, for to him all three cats are public, > objective. He refused to subjectively step into the mind of the > interpreter,

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

In string theory compact dimensions support arithmetic, which in turn supports the evolution of life and dreams. Richard On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Oct 2012, at 10:12, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > > > >> > Life may support mathematics. > > > > Arithmetic may sup

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 12:10 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:42, Stephen P. King wrote: It is the inability of comp to solve the arithmetic body problem that is its Achilles heel. No. It is the strongest point of comp. It does solve it constructively, so it makes comp testable and/or o

The meanings of Peirce's three OBJECTIVE Categories

Hi Craig Weinberg Actually, I may be accused of subtly altering the meanings of Peirce's categories, for to him all three cats are public, objective. He refused to subjectively step into the mind of the interpreter, instead using the word interprant. This is very hard to understand stuff, and s

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On 10/17/2012 11:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Oct 2012, at 20:17, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:08:49 AM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: On 10/16/2012 8:54 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Craig Weinberg> wrote: >> >C

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 17 Oct 2012, at 10:12, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Life may support mathematics. Arithmetic may support life. It is full of life and dreams. Life is a computation devoted to making guesses about the future in order to self preserve . This is only possible in a world where natural c

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" ratherthan"is"

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > while most people are content to accept that these [physical] 'laws' > simply 'are', I am more inclined to question what exactly we mean by that. > It's a pity you weren't also inclined to question what exactly we mean by "free will" given

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On 17 Oct 2012, at 13:14, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My problem with autopoesis is that it only deals with 3p (the outer, objective world) but not with 1p (the inner, subjective world). I agree, but I have not followed the devlopment, which is too verbal for my understanding. N

Re: Solipsism = 1p

On 17 Oct 2012, at 13:07, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Solipsism is a property of 1p= Firstness = subjectivity OK. And non solipsism is about attributing 1p to others, which needs some independent 3p reality you can bet one, for not being only part of yourself. Be it a God, or a physical

Re: The objective world of autopoesis

Hello people, right spelling is autopoiesis and to better understanding I recommend reading "Autopoiesis and Cognition" and "The Tree of Knowledge" from Maturana et Varela. Roberto Szabó Em 17/10/2012, às 09:25, "Roger Clough" escreveu: > Hi Terren Suydam > >IMHO autopoesis, like all o

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On 17 Oct 2012, at 08:52, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/17/2012 2:07 AM, Russell Standish wrote: >The self is directly related to the Dx = "xx" trick, for me. The Dx=xx trick is about self-replication. Of course entities with a sense of the self/other distinction needn't replicate (eg certai

Re: Re: Continuous Game of Life

Hi Bruno Marchal IMHO all life must have some degree of consciousness or it cannot perceive its environment. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Re

Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

On 17 Oct 2012, at 08:07, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:39:18PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Oct 2012, at 23:27, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:44:11PM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: "Computational Autopoetics" is a term I just coined to denote app

A test for solipsism

Hi Bruno Marchal Sorry, I lost the thread on the doctor, and don't know what Craig believes about the p-zombie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie "A philosophical zombie or p-zombie in the philosophy of mind and perception is a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable fr

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:11:00 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:42, Stephen P. King wrote: > > It is the inability of comp to solve the arithmetic body problem > > that is its Achilles heel. > > No. It is the strongest point of comp. It does solve it > c

Re: The objective world of autopoesis

Hi Roger, Autopoeisis says there is a boundary between the environment and the system through which no information crosses (structural closure)... if we apply that model to our nervous system, we can say that the reality we experience is a construction, a virtual reality dynamically generated by t

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 17 Oct 2012, at 02:42, Stephen P. King wrote: It is the inability of comp to solve the arithmetic body problem that is its Achilles heel. No. It is the strongest point of comp. It does solve it constructively, so it makes comp testable and/or our simulation level measurable. You can

Re: autopoesis

OK, to be honest I don't know much about the history of mathematics. I was coming more from the angle that imaginary/complex numbers found application in electromagnetics well after they were introduced in mathematics. On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 Oct 2012, at 1

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 21:56, meekerdb wrote: On 10/16/2012 12:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 2:42:26 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2012 7:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Alberto, OK, I am officially confused by your statements. You previously wrote: "Magi

Re: Continuous Game of Life

On 16 Oct 2012, at 21:55, John Mikes wrote: Bruno: corn starch is not a fluid (newtinian or not). It is a solid and when dissolved in water (or whatever?) it makes a N.N.fluid - My question about it's 'live, or not' status is: does it provide METABOLISM and REPAIR ? I doubt it

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:14:01 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Oct 2012, at 20:17, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:08:49 AM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 10/16/2012 8:54 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:29 AM, C

Re: Peirce's Categories

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:18:26 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_%28Peirce%29 everything-list > > Peirce's Categories (technical name: the cenopythagorean > categories)[8]

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 20:17, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:08:49 AM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: On 10/16/2012 8:54 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >Computation is an overly simplified emergent property of sen

Re: Continuous Game of Life

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:16:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:56, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > Two men and two women live together. The woman has a child. 2+2=5 > > > You mean two men + two women + a baby = five persons. > > You need the arithmetical 2+2=4, and

Re: Continuous Game of Life

On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:56, Craig Weinberg wrote: Two men and two women live together. The woman has a child. 2+2=5 You mean two men + two women + a baby = five persons. You need the arithmetical 2+2=4, and 4+1 = 5, in your "argument". Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You rec

Re: Continuous Game of Life

On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:37, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:40 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> If consciousness doesn't do anything then Evolution can't see it, so how and why did Evolution produce it? The fact that you have no answer to this means your ideas are fatally flawed. >

Re: autopoesis

On 16 Oct 2012, at 17:37, Terren Suydam wrote: Hi Russell, I think if autopoeisis has failed to achieve some practical measure, it is a reflection of how under-developed our collective toolbox is for working with complexity and holistic systems in general. Imaginary numbers are a good example

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if"ratherthan"is"

Dear Stephen, On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:03, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 9:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Oct 2012, at 16:14, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Craig Weinberg After looking at how computers make choices-- whether they are free or whatever-- I now see that my previous position t

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" ratherthan"is"

On 10/17/2012 8:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:00, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 8:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:02:44 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: There is of course the idea that the universe is actually a simulation but that is more c

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" rather than "is"

OK, This post is clearer. forget my early reply. On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:55, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/11 Bruno Marchal On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/10 Bruno Marchal : On 09 Oct 2012, at 18:58, Alberto G. Corona wrote: It may be a zombie or not. I can´t

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" rather than "is"

The quote might be wrong, as you answer statements which are not mine. On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:49, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/10 Alberto G. Corona 2012/10/10 Bruno Marchal : > > On 09 Oct 2012, at 18:58, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > >> It may be a zombie or not. I can´t know. >> >> The same

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 8:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 9:20 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Thanks. My mistake was to say that P's position is that consciousness, arises at (or above ?) the level of noncomputability. He just see

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 9:20 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Thanks. My mistake was to say that P's position is that consciousness, arises at (or above ?) the level of noncomputability. He just seems to say that intuiton does. But that just s

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:05, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 8:33 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Roger, Philosophers such as Lucas, Hofstadter and Chalmers as well as Penrose and Godel suggest that consciousness may be due to incompleteness itself allowing for emergence... Seehttp://vixra.org

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012/10/17 Stephen P. King > On 10/17/2012 4:12 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > >> Life may support mathematics. >> > Hi Alberto, > > OK, we can think of Life, in a very abstract sense, as the generator > of variety and pattern, so that might work. This makes Life = God! > > > > Life is a com

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" ratherthan"is"

On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:00, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 8:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:02:44 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: There is of course the idea that the universe is actually a simulation but that is more controversial. A tempting idea until we que

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:27:51 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Oct 2012, at 14:29, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > Computation is an overly simplified emergent property of sense. > > > That is a form of idealism. > > It pre"suppose sense, so I find it very poor as I am interested in

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 14:55, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Roger, On 10/16/2012 7:48 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ? No! The short answer is that I am proposing that : 1) Penrose's noncomputability position is equivalent

Re: Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 6:33:15 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > By sense do you mean Firstness, Secondness or Thirdness? > Or all three as a process ? > > Using these as a guide: (from http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/thirdness.html) Firstness is th

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complex computations ?

On 16 Oct 2012, at 14:29, Craig Weinberg wrote: Computation is an overly simplified emergent property of sense. That is a form of idealism. It pre"suppose sense, so I find it very poor as I am interested in understanding sense (and matter). Withc omp we pressuppose only numbers and +, an

The objective world of autopoesis

Hi Terren Suydam IMHO autopoesis, like all of AI, is a tool for the public, objective world (Thirdness) That is fine, but the real nitty-gritty (such as mind or consciousness) dwells in subjective experiences (quale) (Firstness). So I don't find autopoesis that useful or profoun

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:14:25 AM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 10/16/2012 10:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:42:16 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 10/16/2012 5:26 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, October 16

Peirce's Categories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_%28Peirce%29 everything-list Peirce's Categories (technical name: the cenopythagorean categories)[8]Name:Typical characterizaton:As universe of experience:As quantity:Technical definition:Valence, "adicity": Firstness.[9]Quality of feeling.Ideas, chance, p

Re: Are we part of a vast, living and 3D holographic simulation

On 15 Oct 2012, at 22:04, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:56 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/15/2012 7:33 AM, John Clark wrote: Nick Bostrum, a philosopher at Oxford University wrote an interesting paper on this subject: http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 11:57:43 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 10/16/2012 10:03 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 6:48:51 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 10/16/2012 4:31 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, October 16,

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of "as if" ratherthan"is"

On 16 Oct 2012, at 10:02, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: A possible answer is that all possible universes exist and we find ourselves in one of those that has the kind of physical laws leading to observers. I'm familiar with the Anth

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

On 10/17/2012 4:12 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Life may support mathematics. Hi Alberto, OK, we can think of Life, in a very abstract sense, as the generator of variety and pattern, so that might work. This makes Life = God! Life is a computation devoted to making guesses about the fut

Re: Re: Computational Autopoetics 1

Hi Bruno Marchal My problem with autopoesis is that it only deals with 3p (the outer, objective world) but not with 1p (the inner, subjective world). Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the followin

Solipsism = 1p

Hi Bruno Solipsism is a property of 1p= Firstness = subjectivity Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Alberto G. Corona Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-16,

Re: Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overlycomplexcomputations ?

Hi Stephen P. King Nothing that is in spacetime can think. Thinking or reasoning is a property of mind, or intelligence, which is outside of spacetime. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the followi

Why self-organization programs cannot be alive

Hi Russell Standish Creating structure out of a random environment requires intelligence, the ability to make choices on one's own. Self-organization does not have that capacity, it merely follows a computer program. So self-organization programs cannot be alive, having no intelligence and no fr

Re: Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overlycomplexcomputations ?

Hi meekerdb 1p = Firstness 3p = Thirdness Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-16, 16:19:29 Subject: Re: Is co

Re: Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

Hi Craig Weinberg By sense do you mean Firstness, Secondness or Thirdness? Or all three as a process ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/17/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012/10/17 Stephen P. King > On 10/16/2012 10:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:42:16 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 10/16/2012 5:26 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:41:59 PM UTC-4, yanniru wrote: >>> >>> Sorry C