On 2/10/2012 7:25 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2012/2/10 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com
<mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com>>
On Feb 10, 4:06 am, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com
<mailto:allco...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 2012/2/9 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com
<mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com>>
>
> > On Feb 9, 9:49 am, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com
<mailto:allco...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > 2012/2/9 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com
<mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com>>
>
> > > > > > How does a gear or lever have an opinion?
>
> > > > > The problems with gears and levers is dumbness.
>
> > > > Does putting a billion gears and levers together in an
arrangement
> > > > make them less dumb? Does it start having opinions at some
point?
>
> > > Does putting a billions neurons together in an arrangement
make them less
> > > dumb ? Does it start having opinions at some point ?
>
> > No, because neurons are living organisms in the first place, not
> > gears.
>
> At which point does it start having an opinions ?
At every point when it is alive.
That's not true, does a single neuron has an opinion ? two ? a thousand ?
We may not call them opinions
Don't switch subject.
because
we use that word to refer to an entire human being's experience, but
the point is that being a living cell makes it capable of having
different capacities than it does as a dead cell.
Yes and so what ? a dead cell *does not* behave like a living cell,
that's enough.
When it is dead,
there is no biological sense going on, only chemical detection-
reaction, which is time reversible. Biological sense isn't time
reversible.
> Why simulated neurons
> couldn't have opinions at that same point ? Vitalism ?
No, because there is no such thing as absolute simulation,
There is no need for an "absolute" simulation... what do you mean by
"absolute" ?
there is
only imitation. Simulation is an imitation
no, simulation is not imitation.
designed to invite us to
mistake it for genuine - which is adequate for things we don't care
about much, but awareness cannot be a mistake. It is the absolute
primary orientation, so it cannot ever be substituted. If you make
synthetic neurons which are very close to natural neurons on every
level, then you have a better chance of coming close enough that the
resulting organism is very similar to the original. A simulation which
is not made of something that forms a cell by itself (an actual cell,
not a virtual sculpture of a cell) probably has no possibility of
graduating from time reversible detection-reaction to other categories
of sense, feeling, awareness, perception, and consciousness, just as a
CGI picture
A CGI picture *is a picture* not a simulation.
of a neuron has no chance of producing milliliters of
actual serotonin, acetylcholine, glutamate,etc.
Is it needed for consciousness ? why ?
Craig
Hi,
How would your reasoning work for a virus? Is it "alive"? I think
that the notion of "being alive" is not a property of the parts but of
the whole.
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
