Having established in the preceding post that a DNA strand is capable of producing a baby given enough nutrients, I'll move forward into the realm of artificial intelligence. At birth the brain already has quite a bit of experience in control systems theory due to keeping the baby's body functioning and growing. At birth a new stage commences of interacting with the environment. Baby inhales and screams! Sad to say, in modern hospitals the presentation of mother's breast to satisfy the demand for a slave by baby is lacking, permanently traumatizing baby's judgmental processes. But that is a topic upon which (as a bachelor) I can be presumed incompetant. So let's move forward. As baby interacts daily, baby becomes aware that sounds and sights are related to the caring of baby. Screams bring attention, relieving baby's soiled diapers and providing food to be converted by baby into growth and waste. Eventually something clicks in baby and baby attempts to imitate the sounds of the nurturers, learning language.
***** CRAZY TALK ALERT ***** Although there is evidence from brain stimulation experiments that electrical probes can stimulate memory RECALL, there is NOT a SHRED of evidence that abstract reasoning occurs within the brain, or even that the data accessed by memory is found in the cells of the brain itself. I claim that structures within the brain have only the purpose of controlling bodily functions and providing a hardware interface for a soul(s) to communicate from higher realms down to the flesh puppet body. If you can swallow that, then the question becomes : "Why is there a soul communications interface built into brains?" Unless you want to get into metaphysical theorizing, I'll just say that "Maybe the situation is more interesting down here..." ***** ***** Having ratcheted the discussion to new heights, let's get back to baby. Using an intuitive grasp of the correlative cause and effect relationship for events sensed which occur in baby's environment, baby constructs decision trees based upon repetitive correlations, evidencing an understanding of probabilistic determinism. Baby experiments with the senses and output mechanisms, moving eyes to track nurturers, focusing upon breast or bottle, experimenting with baby's ability to consume. Before baby ever utters the first word beyond apparently random shrieks, gasps, and gurgles, baby attains some mastery of interpretation of touch, hearing, taste, smell, and sight. Baby practices motion control, reaching out baby's grubby hands to grab whatever is in reach, squirming about for comfort etc. One day baby says "Mmmm" and mama says "mama" back until with practice baby masters its first word. In my case the first word that I *understood* rather than simply imitated was "EAT". I grew up on English with noun, verb, object structure, which sure does look like a "natural" computer language doesn't it? But that is enough about babies, let's get back to the OP topic of the label or address versus the thing. environment and mental status-> senses-> intuitive grasp-> correlation based upon experience-> categorization-> classification-> abstract correlation with memory-> interpretation-> associative reasoning-> insight and inspiration-> abstract reasoning-> judgement-> conclusions and goals->back to top The actual path of information is far more complex than that, with interior loops within stages, feedback to refine senses, feedback to get a better grasp of the situation based upon conclusions etc. The diagram is almost certainly not topologically flat even for an idiot. Notice that the final stage is the drawing of conclusions and goals before going back to square one. Some people jump all of the way from their environment and mental status directly to conclusions and goals, bypassing the intervening stages by "jumping to conclusions" which is relatively "senseless" behavior LOLOL. Some of them even admit that they "don't believe my senses" or exclaim that "This situation is senseless!" End part 2, more forthcoming Lonnie Courtney Clay On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 7:06:20 AM UTC-7, einseele wrote: > > Or yes! > Excellent post LC > > On Jul 26, 10:15 am, Lonnie Clay <clayl...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Yes einseele you make a good point. The label or address if you prefer is > > > not the thing. Others here have made similar observations in the context > of > > philosophical viewpoints regarding what awareness perceives as opposed to > > > what exists. I feel sufficiently inspired this morning to add a penny of > my > > thoughts to what I suspect is going to be a long thread. > > > > Whence come original thoughts, new ideas, intuitive leaps? Do they spring > > > forth from nothingness, being spontaneously created by a critical mass of > > > associations? I think that it was Thomas Edison who said "Genius is 1% > > inspiration and 99% perspiration." In other words, inventing something is > > > easier said than done. Some say that inspiration comes from GOD. But that > > > just shifts the burden to higher ground, because where then does GOD get > the > > raw material for inspiration? > > > > Perhaps someone is a master chef, taking ingredients plucked from the > garden > > or bought at a store and preparing them into a tasty concoction which > gives > > us food for thought. But once again, that begs the question. Whence come > the > > seeds which grow into the ingredients? Where does the chef live, what > does > > that KITCHEN look like, what are the kitchen implements, who manufactured > > > them? > > > > Let's backtrack a bit trying to get at the roots of thinking. > "Information > > alters consciousness." At conception we humans are single cell lifeforms > > created by the cooperation of an egg with an invading sperm cell. Their > DNA > > strands split apart then fuse together to form a new instructional > sequence > > for a hardware specification which has been proven as robust in its fault > > > tolerance, adaptive in its processing, heterogenous in its expansion, and > > > self limiting in its overall design. So eventually you obtain from that > cell > > a human body which contains nervous, circulatory, respiratory, skeletal, > > digestive, immune, muscular, and other systems each of which has > subsystem > > structures composed of cells. At the core of every cell is a DNA strand > > which is a variant of the combined DNA at conception. A cell is itself a > > complex and fascinating package in the microscopic domain. I am a > software > > engineer rather than a biologist, so I will butt out of that topic before > I > > make a silly blunder. > > > > They say that self awareness begins in the womb with sensations of > pressure, > > specifically the pulsing of the mother's heartbeat and sensations of > warmth. > > Later on once the other glands have developed come sound etc. But has the > > > fetus learned anything before leaving the womb? In most cases, there is a > > > definite yes, because one of the things which uncomfortable fetuses do is > > > kick out to let mother know that baby is uncomfortable. Baby will kick > more > > often if mother makes baby comfortable in response to kicking. So there > you > > have it, without instruction in higher institutions of learning even > FETUSES > > understand feedback control theory to a certain extent! LOL LOL LOL! > > > > Encoded in that DNA strand are the instructions for self assembling a > > complete baby, provided that nutrients are available to the cells of the > > fetus in the womb. Implicit in the design of nerve cells is the ability > to > > communicate, store information, and *get this* correlate data in > interaction > > with other cells through threshold triggering of nerve impulses. A nerve > > cell is a networked computer wrapped in foil. It has an identity > depending > > upon its location in the body, a state vector of biological molecules and > > > electrical energy, and a transitional rule subsystem which based upon DNA > > > interprets the cell's state in relation to stimuli to determine what the > > next state will be. > > > > This post is getting to be a bit long, so the discussion will be > continued > > in the next post, upcoming. > > > > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 5:13:14 AM UTC-7, einseele wrote: > > > > > Information technology is a good tool to point an address concept that > > > once in a while I use to bother all of you :-) > > > If we for instance take the string: 'Hello world' and want to express > > > it through a binary code, (this is not trying to discuss IT but > > > linguistics), we get then the following number: > > > > > > 0100100001100101011011000110110001101111001000000111011101101111011100100110110001100100 > > > > > > > If you want it into octal is: > > > > > 110145154154157040167157162154144 > > > > > And there you go > > > > > If you want to play with this, like trying your name or other options > > > there are a bunch of sites which you can visit, like: > > > > >http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1PldXx/nickciske.com/tools/binary.php > > > > > The question is, which is the difference under the information point > > > of view between > > > > > Hello world > > > > 0100100001100101011011000110110001101111001000000111011101101111011100100110110001100100 > > > > > > > or > > > 110145154154157040167157162154144 > > > > > The answer is none > > > > > All three (and many other) point to the same address, using a > > > different mean > > > > > All three are just the pointers, and the address is just one. > > > > > Finally, where is that information (I equal here information = > > > address) > > > > > Information can only be pointed, and will be always absent. Knowledge > > > and information shares this part > > > > > IMHO this is a spatial concept were pointers has of course mass, > > > contrary to information which can only live in the empty part of the > > > equation. > > > > > This is not new of course, it is just the same old battle in > > > epistemology but under a linguistic point of view -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/LwWiIOeJveMJ. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
