On 2/13/2012 9:17 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 2/13/2012 12:05 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/13/2012 8:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Feb 12, 8:09 pm, "Stephen P. King"<stephe...@charter.net> wrote:
Hi Craig,
Great post! Check this
out!http://newempiricism.blogspot.com/2009/02/symbol-grounding-problem.html
Onward!
Stephen
Thanks Stephen,
That's a great one. It does a better job saying what I'm trying to say
on this than I did.
Craig
"The symbol grounding problem does not seem to apply to us. Unlike a digital computer,
we know what we are doing, for instance if I fill a hole by digging soil with a spade
my mind contains the directedness of the loaded spade towards the hole as a real
extension in time (see Time and conscious experience). It is this extension in time
that allows me to know my own symbols.
Harnad (1990) shows that symbols can be grounded by association with real objects in
the world but this demonstration only means that we can construct machines that work,
not that the machines have any internal conscious experience."
It doesn't apply to us because we exist in an environment (where there are spades and
soil). It doesn't apply to the Chinese room either, because there is a world outside
the room in which Chinese is spoken and children are taught Chinese ostensively and by
example.
This goes to my point that, in spite of ones feeling of separation, consciousness
exists relative to an environmental context. The successful substitution of a silicon
based AI module for part (or even all) of a brain depends on its interaction with the
environment.
Brent
--
Hi Brent,
Your point does not counter Craig's point at all. It actually supports it! To
actually implement digital substitution, we would have to not only match the
functionally of the module internally but also match the interactions of that module
with the environment.
I'm aware of that. It doesn't follow though that you must match every interaction (e.g.
cross-section for cosmic gamma rays) or that every match is equally important. I've
already speculated that a silicon based substitute might produce subtle or occasional
differences in conscious thoughts. Craig however denies that a silicon based brain can be
conscious at all.
Brent
Silicon does not have the same chemical properties as carbon.... In effect, digital
substitution requires that the laws of physics be alterable for the transformations
implicit in functional equivalence. Digital substitution is not a local symmetry.
Onward!
Stephen
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4806 - Release Date: 02/12/12
--
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.
--
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.
