On 2/20/2013 8:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 Feb 2013, at 05:28, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:53:46 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
On Wednesday, February 20, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If he is making mice conscious of infra-red light though, then I would
say he
works with consciousness.
How do you know the mice are conscious of infra-red light? If it were a
machine you
would say it wasn't conscious, it just reacted to the light in a way that
superficially resembles consciousness.
That's because we are obliged to give organisms like us the benefit of the doubt. The
opposite is true of machines, where we have seen that their behavior has no basis in
any innate sensitivity or agenda of the machine.
1) nobody has seen this (and I am not sure "seeing that kind of thing" can make
sense).
We can see behavior which is indicative of different levels of intelligence and we can
also observe the structures responsible for computation. For example I know a
neuroscientist who, for ethical reasons, won't eat any kind of animal to that has a
cerebral cortex.
Brent
2) seeing is no proof of existence or inexistence. Nor even ontological
evidence.
Bruno
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
