----- Original Message ---- From: Hank Conn On 9/12/06, Matt Mahoney wrote: >>4. There is no experimental evidence that consiousness exists. You believe >>that it does because animals that lacked an instinct for self preservation >>and fear of death were eliminated by natural selection. >When I say consciousness, I really mean "human-like intelligence", because in >fact consciousness doesn't exist, we are merely using a stronger label. I >think my rather obvious presumption of consciousness being readily modelled by >a computer algorithm speaks for itself on this semantic issue (doesn't it?). I'm not sure about your distinction between human and animal intelligence on the basis of "self-preservation" and "fear of death"- can you cite any literature, or any other relevant info? I think it's a very very common thing for people to define "that one thing" that distinguishes 'human intelligence' from 'animal intelligence', and it's virtually equally common for "that one thing" to be completely wrong. ----- I am not making any distinction between human and animal intelligence. What I mean is that self awareness and the belief in free will (or behavior consistent with such beliefs) are evolved traits. If a rat receives an electric shock every time it stops paddling a wheel, and a second rat recevies exactly the same shocks at the same time, then the second rat will get ulcers, but the first will not. If a dog recevies shocks at random times it eventually withdraws and displays behaviors similar to depressed humans [1]. My point is that the belief that you have control over your environment is necessary for survival, so that is why you believe it. [1] Schwartz, Barry, and Daniel Reisberg, Learning and Memory, New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1991., p. 129 (learned helplessness). -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
