On 8/11/2011 2:54 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/10/2011 11:24 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
And interesting choice of examples since that exactly what man has
done. The speed of light is nothing but a conversion constant
between units. In 1983 the speed of light in SI units was *defined*
to be 299,7
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
>>> Exactly how would we know that that component was unconscious? What is
>>> the test?
>>
>> There is no test, it is just assumed for the purpose of the thought
>> experiment that the component lacks the special sauce required for
>> co
On Aug 10, 10:27 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> Not a good analogy since the US is not conscious as a single entity.
How would we know? It's at least as much of a single entity as any
computer.
The brain is not conscious as a single en
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>> It's not the same outputs for the same inputs, since the mathematician
>> has far more elaborate mental states even if he just answers "21" and
>> "12". For example, he may be thinking about how boring the questions
>> are and about what he is g
On Aug 11, 1:14 am, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/10/2011 8:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
>
> > Hi Stathis,
>
> > Exactly how would we know that that component was unconscious?
> > What is the test?
>
> > Onward!
>
> > Stephen
>
> Your just confusing things. It's a hypothetical. Craig holds that onl
On Aug 11, 1:14 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> The conclusion is that such a device is
> impossible because it leads to conceptual difficulties.
Consciousness itself leads to conceptual difficulties. Except for the
fact that we cannot ignore that it is undeniable, we could never
logically conc
On Aug 11, 3:25 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> The specific question I'm asking is whether it is possible to separate
> consciousness from behaviour.
To which I have responded repeatedly, consciousness and behavior are
not useful terms. If you insist upon using them then the best way to
consid
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> On Aug 10, 10:27 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Craig Weinberg
>> wrote:
>
>> Not a good analogy since the US is not conscious as a single entity.
>
> How would we know? It's at least as much of a singl
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> You will note that there is no claim here about any theory of
>> consciousness: it could be intrinsic to matter, it could come from
>> tiny black holes inside cells, it could be generated on the fly by
>> God. Whatever it is, can it be se
On Aug 11, 10:14 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> >> Not a good analogy since the US is not conscious as a single entity.
>
> > How would we know? It's at least as much of a single entity as any
> > computer.
>
> It's possible that all sorts of systems are conscious without us
> knowing it but th
On Aug 11, 10:22 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Craig Weinberg
> wrote:
> >> You will note that there is no claim here about any theory of
> >> consciousness: it could be intrinsic to matter, it could come from
> >> tiny black holes inside cells, it could be g
On 8/11/2011 12:03 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 8/11/2011 2:54 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/10/2011 11:24 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
And interesting choice of examples since that exactly what man has
done. The speed of light is nothing but a conversion constant
between units. In 1983 the speed
On 8/11/2011 12:25 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Exactly how would we know that that component was unconscious? What is
the test?
There is no test, it is just assumed for the purpose of the thought
experiment that the
On 8/11/2011 5:10 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
It's not the same outputs for the same inputs, since the mathematician
has far more elaborate mental states even if he just answers "21" and
"12". For example, he may be thinking about how bor
On 8/11/2011 7:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
In any case, I have made the thought experiment simpler by*assuming*
that the replacement component is mechanically equivalent to the
biological tissue. We can imagine that it is a black box animated by
God, who makes it tickle the surrounding neur
On 11 August 2011 06:49, Roger wrote:
> Overall, what this means is that our mind's conception of non-
> existence is of just plain "nothingness". But, non-existence itself
> is actually an existent state and can really therefore be called
> "something" instead of "nothing". This means that non
On 11.08.2011 09:25 Stathis Papaioannou said the following:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Stephen P.
King wrote:
...
The specific question I'm asking is whether it is possible to
separate consciousness from behaviour. Is it possible to make a brain
component that from the engineering po
On 8/11/2011 12:01 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.08.2011 09:25 Stathis Papaioannou said the following:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Stephen P.
King wrote:
...
The specific question I'm asking is whether it is possible to
separate consciousness from behaviour. Is it possible to make
I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about this and seem to
approach it from a different perspective than you have.
Not much use in wondering why something exists rather than nothing,
because obviously the latter is not the case.
I came to the conclusion, if "something" exists, why doesn't
every
On Aug 11, 3:13 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> I think consciousness of perception is a narrative story
> the brain makes up for the purpose of memory and future cogitation.
> That's why we have few conscious memories prior to learning language.
I think consciousness of perception is just perception of
On 8/11/2011 12:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 11, 3:13 pm, meekerdb wrote:
I think consciousness of perception is a narrative story
the brain makes up for the purpose of memory and future cogitation.
That's why we have few conscious memories prior to learning language.
I t
On 8/11/2011 12:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 11, 3:13 pm, meekerdb wrote:
I think consciousness of perception is a narrative story
the brain makes up for the purpose of memory and future cogitation.
That's why we have few conscious memories prior to learning language.
I t
On Aug 11, 3:44 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> That's pretty much Antonio Damasio's model of consciousness. Except
> that it's not passive perception, it's creating a coherent model from
> the different perceptions. That's why the binocular conflict is
> resolved just by seeing one image or the other.
On 11.08.2011 21:25 Craig Weinberg said the following:
On Aug 11, 3:13 pm, meekerdb wrote:
I think consciousness of perception is a narrative story the brain
makes up for the purpose of memory and future cogitation. That's
why we have few conscious memories prior to learning language.
I thin
On 8/11/2011 1:04 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.08.2011 21:25 Craig Weinberg said the following:
On Aug 11, 3:13 pm, meekerdb wrote:
I think consciousness of perception is a narrative story the brain
makes up for the purpose of memory and future cogitation. That's
why we have few conscious
Roger,
Sorry to butt in, but I was also thoroughly confused. It seems to me that
you are re-discovering zero "0", as representing a concept of the absence
of any thing.
If you mean that zero is our concept of non existence, and that zero is
defined, not by its attributes, but by the absence of th
On Aug 11, 4:04 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> I would say now that consciousness is conscious perception. The main
> problem in my view though is who follows the narrative. Does your theory
> answer such a question?
Just as an image is an agreement of regions of color and contrast,
consciousness i
On Aug 11, 4:46 pm, meekerdb wrote:
>
> Right. As I said, perception is constructive, not passive.
True, but 'we' aren't the ones doing the constructively. Something
like visual sense is presented to us so that we receive it passively,
even though on the visual level images are being resolved a
On Aug 11, 3:48 pm, Pilar Morales wrote:
> ... To truly define non-existence, you would have to define a set of all
> that it is not: no time, no matter, no energy, no ideas, no mathematical
> constructs, and no each of the etcs to infinity.
So out of nothing the universe of everything is born.
On 8/11/2011 3:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 11, 4:46 pm, meekerdb wrote:
Right. As I said, perception is constructive, not passive.
True, but 'we' aren't the ones doing the constructively. Something
like visual sense is presented to us so that we receive it passively,
even t
On Aug 11, 8:37 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/11/2011 3:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On Aug 11, 4:46 pm, meekerdb wrote:
>
> >> Right. As I said, perception is constructive, not passive.
>
> > True, but 'we' aren't the ones doing the constructively. Something
> > like visual sense is presente
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:16 AM, meekerdb wrote:
>>> But his behavior is exactly the same. Your are evading the hypothesis by
>>> counting internal thoughts as "behavior". As noted before "behavior" is
>>> fuzzy. You could try defining "same behavior" to mean same output for
>>> all
>>> possib
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:24 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/11/2011 7:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> In any case, I have made the thought experiment simpler by *assuming*
> that the replacement component is mechanically equivalent to the
> biological tissue. We can imagine that it is a black bo
On 8/11/2011 8:47 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:16 AM, meekerdb wrote:
But his behavior is exactly the same. Your are evading the hypothesis by
counting internal thoughts as "behavior". As noted before "behavior" is
fuzzy. You could try defining "same behavior
On 8/11/2011 8:50 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:24 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/11/2011 7:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
In any case, I have made the thought experiment simpler by *assuming*
that the replacement component is mechanically equivalent to the
biologic
35 matches
Mail list logo
