From: Tennessee Leeuwenburg (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Dec 21 2005 - 17:58:54 MST
Phillip Huggan wrote:
> I never said from the perspective of the multiverse, that a human
> decision is more significant than other quantum events (unless humans
> decide one day to spawn off their own "universes"). Bad news for you:
> some level of weird physics is responsible for consciousness. Our
> very perception of consciousness is proof that some form of
> spooky physical effects are at play, though not necessarily the
> quantum-mechanical hypothesis I've advanced. To really believe the
> Strong-AI position that consciousness is nothing more than computation
> is absurd. It suggests an abacus is sentient to some degree and that
> I can make people from lego sets.
Well, I completely disagree. It seems obvious that the componentry of
the brain (and body) is no more special than any other physical matter
in this universe. I *start* from the premise that the mind is a machine,
and conclude that consciousness is a feature (epiphenomena) of its
organisation. We have plenty of evidence for the machine nature of the mind.
It does not suggest that an abacus is at all sentient. An abacus is a
simply organised thing, the human body is not.
It is an open question in my mind whether you could make people from
lego sets, but I rather suspect that lego is incapable of supporting the
requisite organisational structures.
Evolution is further evidence for the machine nature of the mind, as it
seems to me we can identify a progression of purely physical change
resulting in the heightened consciousness of humans.
You must be a dualist. I am not.
It may be that consciousness is not digital, but I don't think it is
magical. I don't think it's obvious that quantum effects are involved in
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 20 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT