Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
There are both differences and similarities between machines and organisms.
There is no model of the brain as a machine. There are good descriptions of parts of nervous systems which do tasks that machines also perform, such as following a moving target or locating the direction a sound is coming from. Often people invented the machines or deduced the requirements for solving the problem before it was learned how the nervous system does the same job. One example is servo mechanisms to stabilize deck guns against movements of the ship when trying to target planes.
edit: Your vestibular system and eye muscles stabilize your vision when your head moves but you keep looking at a specific object or in a particular direction.
It is an open question how far our understanding of brain function can go. In addition to better instruments we probably also need new ideas, on the order of Newton developing a mathematics for velocity and acceleration. Or the ideas may already be lying around somewhere but not yet connected to brain science. Or we may stumble onto new findings that show us the way to better understanding of learning, memory, and why we experience the world the way we do.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Just go 50 years back in time to get some perspective.
If not us, computers will figure it out.
If not us .... computers will figure it out.
Are you sure you're OK?
Are you sure you know exactly what you're saying.
Are you really really sure ........
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
We are not there yet, but we will understand how consciousness is created. Just go 50 years back in time to get some perspective. If not us, computers will figure it out.
The notion of perpetual and inevitable progress through science sometimes referred to as positivist modernism is largely an act of faith.
But let's say science uncovers and eventually replicates all knowledge of the mind through some extremely complex machine, then what? What does that say about humanity and the individual life except as a machine you are but a machine among a world of machines and your value is no less and no more, that the meaning of your life is lost to the function of your parts, that nobility and virtue are trivial and only functions of illusion, that the attempt to know thyself is best handled through the proper algorithm. And the best thing to do is have your brain put in a vat of chemicals and electronics with the ecstasy switch always in the on position.
Eudaimonia?
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
To my way of thinking ,a complete scientific understanding of the functioning of human consciousness is not all that big of a deal when compared against the development of AI. In fact, a more or less full solution may already be a fait accompli, as MHz hinted at above when he stated:
Or the ideas may already be lying around somewhere but not yet connected to brain science
If the devevelopment of a valid and thorough model of human brain functioning (similar to Werner's auto manual) could perhaps be just a matter of rummaging around to find it ---then the status of the mind has therefore been demoted from unsolvable mystery to a mere locating and consulting of its proper operating manual.
Of course we already know that brain surgeons do this all the time in relatively limited ways; with great success in most cases, despite the incomplete model they already now possess.
(If our understanding of the brain were as limited as is often suggested then everytime the skull was opened it should result in immediate death)
All of this notwithstanding those who subscribe to a view of human consciousness , or at least elements of that consciousness, as residing fully outside the material world-- are still burdened with the showing of precisely where and how those elements reside. Simply saying that there are elements of human experience outside the limits of the physical world is not a proper and solid argument .But it is always clearly a statement of faith.
On this and similar threads the arguing of these points have become our own groundhog day hell. LOL
Deja vu all over again.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
I recorded Terminator: Salvation and started watching it last night.
Machines can be deadly!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
But let's say science uncovers and eventually replicates all knowledge of the mind through some extremely complex machine, then what?
It's already been done for thousands of years.
Modern scientists can't even think correctly and has nothing but poor fund of logic, reason and knowledge.
The human body is already the extremely complex material vehicular machine of the living entity that gains all knowledge within this material world
thru its proper agents.
Yet the fools want to imitate and create their own selves which are already there and created perfectly for this planet.
And thus they they venture on their foolish journey disregarding their own selves .....
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
But let's say science uncovers and eventually replicates all knowledge of the mind through some extremely complex machine, then what? What does that say about humanity and the individual life except as a machine you are but a machine among a world of machines and your value is no less and no more...
I don't regard the sentiment expressed above as representing a thoroughly invalid thinking-- a bit romantic, but not invalid.
As long as there remains an enduring mystery to the universe---a vast portion that resides outside of our knowing--- then there is ample reason to regard the reductive nature of science,and its certitude , with a dollop of suspicion and caution; especially as it applies to the broader search for knowledge and understanding and the determination of values. All things in human life must be kept in perspective, especially those powerful things that could portend a near total restructuring of how we live and think.
Science can be a bit like government in that a lot of it might be bad , a little of it might be good.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Face it .....
You gross physical materialists ultimately have no real clue WTF you are really doing.
You're just plain winging it in the lab coat cloth of so called science which you've evolved into scientism.
Boxed yourselves into a box with no clue how to get out.
You just keep making the box bigger and more complex but it still remains ultimately a limited BOX ......
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
"Machinery" is man-made.
So this is how many are defining "machinery"? No wonder there's so much argument and misunderstanding and confusion in mixed company and across fields.
The prerequisite that "machinery" is, or must be, man-made is old-school. (Ridiculously old-school.)
A few years worth of biology in such areas as anatomy and physiology, cellular biology, genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology (yes they are different fields with different emphases), neuroscience and/or microbiology makes this obvious - as all young people who have had experience and training in these subjects would know.
"Cellular machinery." The "machinery of life." "Neuro-machinery." Such expressions reflect the new understanding. They are here to stay. Best to adapt.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Information is material? (That would include thoughts, no doubt.)
You give a new meaning to empirical.
I don't think I do (give a new meaning...), but rather look at the science that has grown up around considering information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory
you have Claude Shannon to thank for starting this, and it is typical of how science often starts and generalizes from a specific focus. In Shannon's case, he was interested in understanding aspects of signal processing.
Signal processing itself is a very general operation, one that biological systems execute as well as man made machinery, and the lessons of Information Theory generalize to understanding how biological systems manage information.
Given that a full blown physical theory exists describing "information" it is perhaps difficult to understand why making the statement "information is material" would be surprising, let alone controversial. By material, here, we have essentially extended the concept to include those phenomena which are describable as physical systems.
Given that life on Earth is based on the molecular machinery of DNA and that the inheritance of information through our DNA (which contains the physical plan of our bodies, etc) it would seem a rather straight forward extension of the ideas of a "machine" capable of "reading" information, "acting" on that information and communicating it to other machines.
http://schneider.ncifcrf.gov
How would you know you are not a machine?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
a lucky machine...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Yes just read the all the boring data from fords engine and Toyota's engine.
Meanwhile just forget all about the owner and driver of those machines.
They're no good .... :-)
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
If we view the brain as simply machine, lets say like my laptop, then whence comes the software? That the soft ware is part and parcel to the machine itself seems somehow outside the very notion of what a machine is, a computer, say, that writes its own code as it simultaneously becomes increasingly complex.
I think an organism in which the various parts of the organism operate with purpose to the advantage of the entirety in a remarkable cooperation becomes something more than just a machine.
How would you know you are not a machine?
As well, how would you know you are?
Cogito ergo sum
And in the "I" is the mystery that takes us outside the realm of machines.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
I'm fond of the deus ex machine
It can explain so much!
;>)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Science keeps outpacing your philosophy, Werner. Better run faster!
No it didn't.
There was a living entity that needed to originally program and ultimately turn on and off the machine.
You're a fool with your foolish logic and reason ......
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
If we view the brain as simply machine, lets say like my laptop, then whence comes the software? That the soft ware is part and parcel to the machine itself seems somehow outside the very notion of what a machine is, a computer, say, that writes its own code as it simultaneously becomes increasingly complex.
The brain is not a "simple machine" like your laptop. It is also not entirely a general purpose, stored program computer like your lap top, which was based on von Neumann's original architecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_architecture
however, very much like biological machines, von Neumann considered the limitations of the then current technologies to devise a scheme that would function reliably enough, and generalize to expanding applications. This has been a 70 year development. Computing machines have grown in complexity and speed, from 1000s of operations per second and 5000 bytes of memory to computers today capable of 33.86 quadrillion operations per second and 1.4 Petabytes of memory.
The architectures of biological system computation are very different from the human designed and built computer.
You might consider defining what "complex" is, also, it is not so easy and the effort is well worth it in terms of providing insight into that often used adjective.
I think an organism in which the various parts of the organism operate with purpose to the advantage of the entirety in a remarkable cooperation becomes something more than just a machine.
What would that be? something more than a machine? the generalization of machine to automata
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automata_theory
which can be constructed of elements following rudimentary rules, but displaying complex behavior. There are biological considerations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_automaton
and all that...
http://poietic-generator.net
And in the "I" is the mystery that takes us outside the realm of machines.
or the part of the program that is missing or can't be accessed... or perhaps isn't there in the first place.
We can call it a mystery, but mysteries are often illusions of misdirection.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
And in the "I" is the mystery that takes us outside the realm of machines.
The "I" is the personalized individual living entity itself.
Not really any big mystery at all.
The "I" (living entity) is never impersonal.
It always has individuality.
The "I" is the embodied soul within the material organic body that drives its material body just as the driver drives the gross material man made machines we create by manipulating the material energies.
A gross physical man made machine can be operated also by remote and put into a programed autopilot mode by an OPERATOR (The "I").
These man made machines ultimately need a living entity to turn them ON in the beginning to run .......
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
I think an organism in which the various parts of the organism operate with purpose to the advantage of the entirety in a remarkable cooperation becomes something more than just a machine.
Yes they do, that's why we call them 'organisms' and not 'machines'.
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
The DNA Replication Complex, an assembly of proteins that synthesizes new DNA before cell division. It consists of Helicase, Primase, Single-strand binding proteins, and DNA polymerase III. Because DNA strands can only be copied in one direction, the complex must pull out loops of one strand and replicate it in fragments. At this moment there are hundreds of trillions of these molecular machines in constant activity within your body.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
MH2: There is no model of the brain as a machine.
Oh, come on. There is. It’s called the computer metaphor of the brain. There is processing, there is memory—and there are various functions that are slaves and nexus to those operations—but that’s a heavy-handed conceptualization that we don’t have any evidence for.
Furthermore, do that explains or describes anything that you experience?
(Do you think I’m being unfair?)
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!