SUPER Computers, Robots & Humans

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

manored
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 07:33 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71226 wrote:
It might. The brain could just be a solid piece of mass that just sits there. But we still have the problem of where the brain came from and why the heck the mind even bothers with it. Just go to sleep and don't wake up and be happy as a mind.

Rich
I think we are straying away from the original point: The issue is not if the brain is necessary, it is, but whenever its possible to copy one's mind to another one, what I believe to be possible.

If I go to sleep and dont wake up, my mind will go elsewhere, it wont just stay there thinking to itself Smile
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 07:47 pm
@manored,
manored;71242 wrote:
I think we are straying away from the original point: The issue is not if the brain is necessary, it is, but whenever its possible to copy one's mind to another one, what I believe to be possible.

If I go to sleep and dont wake up, my mind will go elsewhere, it wont just stay there thinking to itself Smile


It is interesting thought that the mind wanders here and there, disconnected from the brain - the brain being a superfluous piece of mass that is really doing nothing. Maybe it is just there to give the head shape.

However, now we have to figure out how to create a mind that can wander in and out of a machine on its own. Because that is some trick.

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 08:34 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71246 wrote:
It is interesting thought that the mind wanders here and there, disconnected from the brain - the brain being a superfluous piece of mass that is really doing nothing. Maybe it is just there to give the head shape.

However, now we have to figure out how to create a mind that can wander in and out of a machine on its own. Because that is some trick.

Rich
I would say that the mind is an emergent feature of the brain, and as such, the mind can not be disassociated from the brain. It is analogous to saying you can seperate water from the wetness of water.

I do not think a mind is created, a mind emerges. You need to create a suitable system that can allow and support an emergent mind. The brain does this. What would be interesting is, that if a synthetic system can support a mind, at what point does this support occur. Would this provide us with an objective "this is the minimum requirement to support a mind", rather than the subjective "it only has a mind if it is identical to me"

If the brain is to be considered a superfluous piece of mass that is really doing nothing, and more specifically, does not provide a base from which the mind can emerge, then does a rock have a mind? If mind does not emerge from the brain then surely a rock could have a mind.
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 08:39 pm
@validity,
validity;71264 wrote:
I would say that the mind is an emergent feature of the brain,


OK, then they are connected, if I understand you correctly. One emerges from another. Sort of like waves from an ocean. Rain from a cloud.

Personally, I go the other way (brain emerges from mind - and I have reasons for this), but which ever way you go, they have to be connected somehow, otherwise one is doing its thing while the other is ... I guess just doing something else.

So if we want to build a computer, we have to have a mind emerging from a computer chip. Cute. I like it.

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 09:16 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71269 wrote:
Personally, I go the other way (brain emerges from mind - and I have reasons for this), but which ever way you go, they have to be connected somehow, otherwise one is doing its thing while the other is ... I guess just doing something else.
Could you please elaborate on the reasons why you think it is brain emerges from mind.
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 09:28 pm
@validity,
validity;71284 wrote:
Could you please elaborate on the reasons why you think it is brain emerges from mind.


It has to do with my own personal metaphysics which is sort of a combination of Heraclitus, Daoism, thoughts of Itzhak Bentov, and my own imaginative thoughts. But I see Individual Consciousness (what you call mind, but I call Yi), as transcendental, and the brain being part of a nervous system along with the spine, that collects and transmits information for Consciousness.

So terminology and concepts are quite different and this is just a outline so as not to bore you. My blog has some of my thoughts.

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 09:53 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71287 wrote:
It has to do with my own personal metaphysics which is sort of a combination of Heraclitus, Daoism, thoughts of Itzhak Bentov, and my own imaginative thoughts. But I see Individual Consciousness (what you call mind, but I call Yi), as transcendental, and the brain being part of a nervous system along with the spine, that collects and transmits information for Consciousness.

So terminology and concepts are quite different and this is just a outline so as not to bore you. My blog has some of my thoughts.

Rich
Ah yes, a transcendental view will make our thoughts approach from opposite directions Smile
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 09:58 pm
@validity,
validity;71290 wrote:
Ah yes, a transcendental view will make our thoughts approach from opposite directions Smile


My transcendental view emanates from the thought that what we call inherited characteristics are examples of skills that we inherited from prior existences.

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 10:13 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71291 wrote:
My transcendental view emanates from the thought that what we call inherited characteristics are examples of skills that we inherited from prior existences.

Rich
What do you mean by inherited characteristics?

PS for me it is not a view, but rather empirical fact, that inherited characteristics are inherited from genetic transmission.
 
richrf
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 10:19 pm
@validity,
validity;71297 wrote:
PS for me it is not a view, but rather empirical fact, that inherited characteristics are inherited from genetic transmission.


Genes? How does one know how to think from a gene. I don't see the connection? A gene is some stuff, isn't it? Thinking is .... well you can fill in the blank.

I don't get it. This little thing-a-ma-jig knows how to think? Can it talk, smell, and do other things like twirling a hoola-hoop around its belly?

Inherited characteristics are something like this:

YouTube - The Next Mozart? 6-Year Old Piano Prodigy Wows All

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Mon 22 Jun, 2009 10:45 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71299 wrote:
Genes? How does one know how to think from a gene. I don't see the connection? A gene is some stuff, isn't it? Thinking is .... well you can fill in the blank.
Which is why I asked what you mean by inherited characteristics. Thinking is not what I consider an inherited characteristic. One knows how to think because one has the organs that allow the process of thinking to occur.

richrf;71299 wrote:
I don't get it. This little thing-a-ma-jig knows how to think? Can it talk, smell, and do other things like twirling a hoola-hoop around its belly?
No. It's function is to hold, carry and relay information. That information does not think, talk, smell etc but provides the information on how to build structures that can, for example, think, talk, smell etc .

richrf;71299 wrote:
Inherited characteristics are something like this:

YouTube - The Next Mozart? 6-Year Old Piano Prodigy Wows All

Rich
Thank you. Now I know what you mean.
 
manored
 
Reply Tue 23 Jun, 2009 01:31 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71246 wrote:
It is interesting thought that the mind wanders here and there, disconnected from the brain - the brain being a superfluous piece of mass that is really doing nothing. Maybe it is just there to give the head shape.

However, now we have to figure out how to create a mind that can wander in and out of a machine on its own. Because that is some trick.

Rich
Err, sorry, I was unclear. I meant "go" in a metaphysical kind of way, as I dont consider the mind to be "placed" somewhere, merely receiving information from something that is. with "go somewhere else" I meant "find a new source of information" or, to put it in a more daring way "get connected to a new body".

validity;71264 wrote:
I would say that the mind is an emergent feature of the brain, and as such, the mind can not be disassociated from the brain. It is analogous to saying you can seperate water from the wetness of water.

I do not think a mind is created, a mind emerges. You need to create a suitable system that can allow and support an emergent mind. The brain does this. What would be interesting is, that if a synthetic system can support a mind, at what point does this support occur. Would this provide us with an objective "this is the minimum requirement to support a mind", rather than the subjective "it only has a mind if it is identical to me"
That indeed seens a better way to put things... well, then, If we made a eletronic brain that works exactly like a human's, then adjusted it to reproduce the current state of that of a living human, do you think the result can be called a mind?
 
richrf
 
Reply Tue 23 Jun, 2009 01:42 pm
@manored,
manored;71442 wrote:
That indeed seens a better way to put things... well, then, If we made a eletronic brain that works exactly like a human's, then adjusted it to reproduce the current state of that of a living human, do you think the result can be called a mind?


In order to answer this question, I would have to know what you mean by working "exactly like a human's". Observe everything that a human can do. Go to youtube and flip through it, for examples. Is this what you are proposing to duplicate?

Rich
 
validity
 
Reply Tue 23 Jun, 2009 04:46 pm
@manored,
manored;71442 wrote:
If we made a eletronic brain that works exactly like a human's, then adjusted it to reproduce the current state of that of a living human, do you think the result can be called a mind?

I make reference to my earlier post,

validity;70027 wrote:
The problem is how do you show that your very complex robot has free will or is genuinely having the experience of emotions or is just a convincing copy?


Determining objectively if mind has indeed emerged from the electronic brain could be more of a challenge than constructing the electronic brain.

However to answer your question, I would have to say yes, for to deny that an electronic brain, that works exactly like a human's (taken to mean that a state of mind emerges ie intellect and consciousness manifested as combinations of thought, perception, memory, emotion, will and imagination, including all of the brain's conscious and unconscious cognitive processes Mind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) would be to deny all manifestations of states that appear identical to my mind e.g. every other humans mind. In which case, should I deny my mind as well?
 
manored
 
Reply Tue 23 Jun, 2009 07:44 pm
@richrf,
richrf;71448 wrote:
In order to answer this question, I would have to know what you mean by working "exactly like a human's". Observe everything that a human can do. Go to youtube and flip through it, for examples. Is this what you are proposing to duplicate?

Rich
I mean, same amount of data lost, same way of recording data, etc.
 
richrf
 
Reply Tue 23 Jun, 2009 08:43 pm
@manored,
manored;71561 wrote:
I mean, same amount of data lost, same way of recording data, etc.


As I see it, in order to be identical, they would have to be capable of performing identical things. As I inspect the brief laundry list of what humans can do, including create more humans, I would say that the computer has a long way to go. And, of course, by the time the computer gets there (if it ever does), the it would have to have evolved so that it is whereever the human mind is at that future date.

I think anything is possible. But we will have to wait and see.

Rich
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 24 Jun, 2009 10:01 am
@richrf,
richrf;71592 wrote:
As I see it, in order to be identical, they would have to be capable of performing identical things. As I inspect the brief laundry list of what humans can do, including create more humans, I would say that the computer has a long way to go. And, of course, by the time the computer gets there (if it ever does), the it would have to have evolved so that it is whereever the human mind is at that future date.

I think anything is possible. But we will have to wait and see.

Rich
If we tie up a human in a bed and take control of all his senses, so he only receives the information we provide him, and make him unable to anything other than communicating through a equipment reading his mind, then that means he is not human anymore?

If we, somehow remove someone's brain, put it in a "jar" (see "brain in a jar") and then connect wires to it that allow to receive and send information, its not human anymore?
 
richrf
 
Reply Wed 24 Jun, 2009 10:28 am
@manored,
manored;71760 wrote:
If we tie up a human in a bed and take control of all his senses, so he only receives the information we provide him, and make him unable to anything other than communicating through a equipment reading his mind, then that means he is not human anymore?

If we, somehow remove someone's brain, put it in a "jar" (see "brain in a jar") and then connect wires to it that allow to receive and send information, its not human anymore?


I have never tried these things, but I think if you tie up a human to a bed, it is going to do all kinds of things. You may try to suppress his senses, but I don't think you can control them.

If you remove someone's brain, I think that human is dead. For me, the physical body is a manifestation of what is human. But I never tried this, so I don't know for sure.

Rich
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 24 Jun, 2009 02:37 pm
@TurboLung,
Then, we have different views of what a human is, im afraid Smile
 
richrf
 
Reply Wed 24 Jun, 2009 03:44 pm
@manored,
manored;71819 wrote:
Then, we have different views of what a human is, im afraid Smile


Yep. I think I would agree with that. Smile

Rich
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/05/2024 at 12:29:02