On 13 Aug 2014, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/13/2014 7:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Does Bruno actually say what he thinks consciousness is? (This is
probably somewhere beyond the MGA, which is where I tend to get
stuck...)
When I've asked directly what it would take to make a robot
conscious, he's said Lobianity. Essentially it's the ability to
do proofs by mathematical induction and prove Godel's theorem.
But "ability" seems to be just in the sense of potential, as a
Turing machine has the ability to compute anything computable.
That is what you need for your robot being able to be conscious.
OK. But to be conscious, you need not just the machine/man, but
some connection with god/truth.
To put is roughly the believer []p is never conscious, it is the
knower []p & p who is conscious. It is very different: []p can be
defined in arithmetic. []p & p cannot be defined in arithmetic, or
in the machine's language.
But that's just an abstract definition. What is the operational
meaning of "p".
It is means true in (N, +, *). This cannot be defined in PA, but you
don't need to define it in PA, to get the needed consequences.
If consciousness depends on knowing and knowing depends of my belief
being true, then I will be unconscious if my belief is mistaken.
Not necessarily, because although your belief is false, you can still
have the true belief that you believe it. []p can be false, yet [k][]p
can be true. That would be the case in a dream, for example. You
believe that you can walk on water (false), but you believe also that
you believe that you can walk and that belief is true, so you are
conscious in the dream, even if the belief that you can walk on water
is false.
I recall that [k]x = []x & x.
That makes no sense. Consciousness obviously does not depend on "&
p". In my view consciousnees is creating an internal mode of the
world.
That is what []p does. It is related to the 1p consciousness of that
belief through [k][]p
The model includes propositions "p" which are more or less true
depending on their correspondence with the world.
Which world? The arithmetical reality, or a primitive physical world?
Operationally this means they have consistency and predictive power.
That works for unconscious belief too. You need truth to make it into
knowledge (which is not certainty).
A weak form of certainty needs the "& <>p" or equivalently "& <>t".
Bruno
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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/d/optout.
