On 16 October 2013 01:26, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:14:36 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: > > Thanks for your answer. That was not quite what I was asking though. >> Let's say the nano-tech did not extend some living organism, but were some >> entirely autonomous, entirely artificial cell-like structures, which could >> find and utilize energy sources in the environment and reproduce >> themselves. Let's say after millions (or billions) of years, these >> self-replicating nanobots evolved into "multi-cellular" organisms like >> animals we are familiar with today. Could they have experiences like other >> biological creatures that have a biological lineage? If not, why not? >> > > No, I don't think that they could have experiences like biological > creatures. If they could, then we *should *probably see at least one > example of > Excuse me for butting in, but I'm not sure what "should" means here. Are you saying these things should *already* exist? But the original suggestion was about future technology... Though I can't see what else you could mean, though. > > 1. a natural occurrence of inorganic biology > Why would it occur naturally, when organic biology has done so, and presumably used up all the food sources that might be available? > 2. an organism which can survive only on inorganic nutrients > ??? > 3. a successful experiment to create life from basic molecules > Arguably the biosphere counts as this, presumably not an intentional experiment. > 4. a machine which seems to feel, care, and have a unique and unrepeatable > personal presence > Arguably a human being is one of these > 5. a mechanized process which produces artifacts that seem handmade and > unique > 6. two separate bodies who are the same person > 7. an organism which reproduces by transforming its environment rather > than reproducing by cell division > This seems to me to have gone completely off the point. > 8. an organism which emerges spontaneously from Boltzmann conditions in > the environment rather than seeded inheritance > What?!? (He said billions of years, not googolplexes...!) > 9. an event or observation which leads us to conclude that gathering > energy and reproduction are sufficient to constitute bio-quality awareness. > > I don't understand that sentence. I may be missing something here but I believe the question is whether machines can have experiences. Isn't a human being a machine that has experiences? -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
