> From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > That's correct. The model of consciousness should be the self [brain- > body] > watching and physically interacting with the movie [that is in a sense > an > "open movie" - rather than on a closed screen - projected all over the > world > outside, and on the inside of the body]. The self is an integrated > brain-body unit, acting and responding with the whole body. > > But you missed out the all-important part which I believe you're all > skipping over. What is your or anyone else's model of consciousness? > Which > model are you using? Or do you know anyone else using? Or do you not > have a > model? > > You've been talking about "consciousness" - *what* have you been talking > about? Honestly? >
Mike, Just because you have movies and theatres and are experiencing a simuworld in your mind rolling around in the sand feeling all warm and fuzzy doesn't make it work. There are a few quantitative systems relationships that need to be strictly defined in order to have a model that isn't just a bunch of ideas slapped together that sound good to a philosophy student. The system has to come together in such a way that it functions and operates like a machine or a machine derivative so that you can actually build it within a lifetime. There are consciousness patterns. And there are consciousness inkblots. John ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
