Crick's "Astonishing Hypothesis" (the name of Crick's book on the
subject) is emergence and identity theory - and the continuing focus of
Crick's younger partner (Crick himself died recently) Christophe Koch at
CalTech is neuronal according to Koch's recent book (as I recall).
All theories dependent on emergence and identity are essentially appeals
to magic - despite the wide popularity of the argument (including the
popular appeals by Wolfram, Kurzweil et al.).
Koch is fairly religious (Catholic) - and has recently written about his
religion on his web site - and without making aspersions upon his
integrity I do find that a number of scientists in the field that are
prepared to accept such magic are also religious. As a result they may,
in fact, be predisposed to the argument that "God did it."
My own view is that these appeals to magic as the product of
intellectual laziness. :-)
With respect,
Steven
Jim Piat wrote:
Make of that what you will :-)
With respect,
Steven
Dear Steven,
I think Crick of DNA fame was also seeking consciousness in the
microtubials. What troubles me most about the search for the neural
basis of consciousness is our lack of a coherent and satisfying
working definition of consciousness. I doubt we will find the
neurological basis of something we can't identify in the first place.
The effort begs the question. Moreover neurons may be a necessary
without being a sufficient condition for consciousness.
Just one layman's opinion.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
