On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:19:54 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 10/16/2012 12:41 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: > > On 10/16/2012 2:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > > On 10/16/2012 7:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: > > Hi Alberto, > > OK, I am officially confused by your statements. You previously wrote: > "Magic emergence from magic enough complexity has been advocated for almost > anything." and now you suggest that consciousness is contingent on a level > of evolution, ala: "... in this stage of evolution a form of consciousness > becomes a necessity". > How is this not an argument for emergence from complexity? What is > evolution other than a mechanism in Nature to generate increasing stable > complex structures in the physical universe? Either consciousness is an > irreducible primitive or it is not? > I agree that complexity *is* involved when we consider issues such as > "reportablity" of consciousness, but the property of "having a subjective > experience of being in the world" itself can be strongly argued to flow at > the most basic level that allows differences. > > > If there are no inputs from the world to perceive, e.g. a person in a > sensory deprivation tank, or the 'perceptions' are very simple > interactions, e.g. an orbital electron scattering a photon what will be the > content of this subjective experience? > > Brent > -- > > Hi Brent, > > How so? Do we humans have "orbital electron scattering" of photons as > actual experiential content? > > > No, but Craig thinks electrons do. >
Only if electrons actually exist. I think there is a good chance that they are only the shared experience of atoms. > > It seems to me that all talk of "orbital electron scattering a photon"that is > an abstract narrative that we talk to each other about and use to > make predictions of phenomena that is within our sphere of mutual > non-contradiction. > > > Sure, the 3p story is one we create to explain intersubjective agreement > about 1p experience. But my point is that consciousness is not basic, > otherwise it wouldn't need external stimuli to avoid infinite loops. > I can't find anything about infinite loops associated with sensory deprivation. I have never heard it mentioned and even the author of this article http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/the-nothing-eaters/Content?oid=5539022 spent 90 to 2.5 hours in there with no mention of any such thing. Craig > Brent > > Our knowledge of physical laws, like all content of experience is 1p that > could be defined as 3p iff possible. > > > -- > 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 everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/BM2YYqCtqJEJ. 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.
