Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 12:04pm PT
|
Newton invented modern calculus, you know.
Really? how nice for him.
Were you aware that he thought his greatest achievement in life was his life long celibacy?
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 12:17pm PT
|
Love was sewn into the fabric of the universe the moment it emerged and not a moment before.
It's good to know some folks have certain knowledge of the state of affairs prior to the emergence of the universe. We should all have such mystical gifts.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 12:19pm PT
|
Ants are helpless from 1/3 to 2/3 of their lifespans until they reach adulthood. Immature individuals of a lot of mammal species are relatively helpless against the elements and predators without the protection of adults, even if they can hobble around a bit better than a human baby on Day 1.
Humans take a long time to develop in part because we're a much more complicated bio machine to build than other critters.
It's also helpful to remember that a human can become a fairly lethal predator by age 4 or 5.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 12:41pm PT
|
Keep asking questions, but if you want to close a door you need a better argument than, "awareness is not a thing."
---
It is not an argument but an observation. What's more, if you want to "open the door" to the belief that awareness is a thing, in and of itself, then you need to DEMONSTRATE, at least in theory , how this might possibly be so.
If you hold onto the hope that awareness is a thing, then you are left with two choices when it comes time to describe or write code for brain function. For if awareness is a mechanical thing, then we can in theory replicate it mechanically.
First choice: Go with the belief that awareness is simply what the brain does. Here we can go with the complexity and integration model which holds out the hope that once the digital brain replica reaches a certain level of complexity and the myriad faux neuro pathways are sufficiently connected and integrated, self awareness will naturally "arise" from the matrix.
The problem with this model - as it's been pointed out many times before - there are many instances in the material and biological world where fantastic degrees of complexity have been achieved and yet in no instance has this wrought anything other than objective functioning - that is, stuff doing mechanical or biological stuff, and creating or initiating mechanical and biological results. There is no instance in Nature where complexity has sourced any phenomenon remotely like sentience.
The other option is to approach awareness as thought it were a thing in and of itself, as opposed to bio blow back or some epiphenomenon that emerges from lower level objective functioning. But the challenge here is that you need to objectify awareness in and of itself, then, as you do with other mechanical functions per digital processing, separate out awareness from other discrete bits and parts and aspects of the "digital substrate," and no one has a clue per how to do this.
My sense is that a new approach is needed to really make any progress on this.
JL
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 12:56pm PT
|
"There is no instance in Nature where complexity has sourced any phenomenon remotely like sentience."
So what, we don't even exist now?
Dayum. That's some no-thing shiite right there, boyo.
As we build more sophisticated AI, we won't discover how to squeeze sentience from a machine - we'll discover that we are, in fact, machines ourselves.
Anyone doubt this? Stop breathing and watch what the machine you live in does in response.
Given how much our subconscious calls the shots - our focus on awareness masks just how automated we really are.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 01:36pm PT
|
Anyone doubt this? Stop breathing and watch what the machine you live in does in response.
Probably more healthy to stop thinking and watch what the mind you live in does in response.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 01:44pm PT
|
"...watch what the machine you live in does in response."
"...watch what the mind you live in does in response."
How about both?
Mindfulness meditation aside, aren't we all big "believers" in exploring the mental life?
.....
"I want to come clean about My war experience. I caused them all." -God, this morning's tweet
.....
"our focus on awareness masks just how automated we really are."
Ignorance or inexperience, too.
I mean, if you never look under the hood. You gots to look "under the hood."
Let's be honest, not many percentage wise in the wider public do.
That defines the culture.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 01:55pm PT
|
Yeah, anyone who's ever helped a friend or family through a brain injury quickly realizes just how machine-like we really are.
That woo crap? That's a vacation fantasy for healthy people.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 01:59pm PT
|
Sentience may have emerged with the evolution of the neo-cortex - in small mammals at the end of the Triassic if not in more primitive forms in reptiles sooner than that.
In any case, it's been around for a while.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:09pm PT
|
System integration often employs a black box approach - doesn't matter how a subsystem works as long as it provides the right IO interface to work with the rest of the system.
Sooooo....
Let's say we can develop a 'black box' artificial neuron that interfaces seamlessly with biological neurons.
What would happen if one biological neuron at a time is replaced with an equivalent artificial one until the entire neural system is artificial?
Would the mind suddenly go dark once the brain became 'too artificial'?
Why?
If not, then it's possible to build a sentient machine.
Of course it is. We already are exactly that.
That no one knows how to program a brain today is a ridiculous argument. The Romans had no supercomputers, either. OK. Pointlessness well taken.
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what the world will be like in a 100 years? 1000 years? Yeah. Good luck with that.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:10pm PT
|
A strong case could be made that Sentience isn't the sole property of humans
Yes all living entities are sentient beings according to their developed consciousness.
Sentience is rooted in the soul and not in the material body.
All intelligence is rooted from the souls consciousness.
The modern scientific theory that the brain is the conscious root is poor fund of knowledge projected by the HFCS's of scientism.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:13pm PT
|
Come see us after your first stroke and we'll revisit your theory of mind.
If you can communicate at all, that is.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:13pm PT
|
Love . What is love. I would posit that it is the ability to pay attention to someone as in really listening to them. Not reinterpreting what they say and feel to how it is affecting you. Often people will think they are loving someone but they are just imposing their will (ego) on the other person. One of the main purpose's of the meditation tool is to learn how to listen.
Is that the woo crap you are referring to tvash?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:21pm PT
|
Love . What is love. I would posit that it is the ability to pay attention to someone as in really listening to them.
I tried this with the Judge, but I found no love.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:22pm PT
|
This whole thing really boils down to the 'soul cutoff' problem.
Who gets one? Viruses? No way. Things with eyes? No, that isn't arbitrary at all. Neocortexers only? Dogs? Cats? Gerbils?
If mind isn't what the brain/body system does, then something else has to make it happen. How does an organism join that club, I wonder? Evolution has nothing to say about it - and, sorry, but if evolution doesn't have anything to say about it - it ain't alive.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:24pm PT
|
Love is prioritizing the well being of another on par with or above your own and acting accordingly.
Listening is but one part of that.
And no, that isn't the woo crap I was referring to. What I was referring to is easily gleaned through context.
Someone might think about brushing up on their listening skills.
People who proclaim themselves as good listeners are about the same as people who claim they're good looking.
Both are measured in the eyes of the beholder, not the braggart.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:34pm PT
|
Since we're guessing, I'd bet sentience (capacity to feel, something Data in his default mode didn't do) goes all the way down and back to primitive reptiles, maybe even amphibians or fish.
I'm a vegan 4 years now.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:41pm PT
|
Guess you won't be joining me for BBQ rib eye tonight.
My ancestors didn't risk their ass by coming out of the trees to eat quinoa. Adopting meat into our diet was key to our brain development.
I plan on paying homage to that brave effort this evening.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 02:49pm PT
|
What love is depends on your values. I have no problem understanding PSP.
Listening and tuning in to another person is art. I've been a slow learner. The last few years I've slowly started to learn more and with intention.
To listen is not only or primarily to listen to the words to understand. The intonation or song of the voice and the non-verbal cues are very important. My slow learning started when my mother at the age of 73 started to developed dementia. I still wanted to connect. The last years she has lost more and more of her verbal language. I have learned a lot about the intonation of the voice and non verbal cues. Speak with a soft and friendly voice, act firmly but not insistingly (never push), let go, follow her, try again, and my mother listens and follows. Mirror her use of the voice and she listens. I have to listen to her first to understand where she is right now and then mirror her voice and behaviour, I have to walk with her for half an hour, and then we connect. There's no place for arrogance any more.
Some will see this as woo, woo. I don't. God bless science...
|
|
feralfae
Boulder climber
in the midst of a metaphysical mystery
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2015 - 03:15pm PT
|
Tvash said: //As we build more sophisticated AI, we won't discover how to squeeze sentience from a machine - we'll discover that we are, in fact, machines ourselves.
Anyone doubt this? Stop breathing and watch what the machine you live in does in response//.
May I point out that first you say that we are machines ourselves, but then you switch point of view and say "that the machine we live in".
Do we live in the machine, or are we the machine, in your view of view, or do we both live in and operate our machine? Do you see our sense of self limited to a sense of self as the machine?
About Werner: I think we need curmudgeons, iconoclasts, and skeptics in any society or tribe or family. We need someone out at the edge, peering into other spaces and ideas. We need someone to call into question our most cherished beliefs, so that we examine and test those beliefs and thereby inform and improve our own operating paradigm sets. We also need curmudgeons so we have a reason to smile and nod at each other, sharing in the gentle amusement of being able to say, "Oh, look, Werner is at it again." while he slips in some truthful zingers occasionally just to keep us on our mental toes. :)
To Werner: Werner, did you not notice that when I asked you how you knew, you instead told me how I might know. I did not ask, "How do you know that I do or do not have Free Will?" I asked, "How you know You have or do not have free will?" Which is quite a different question. Besides, I think it is my job to figure out the answer to that question about myself for myself.
Thank you Largo.
feralfae
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!