Consciousness, New Thinking About

Kenneth Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Mon Jun 17 10:08:12 EST 2002


John H. wrote in message ...
>In my model at least the information processing device is not the owner,
the
>owner is only one aspect of the information processing device. What the
>conscious I experiences is not what my brain experiences. These really are
>two different worlds of experience. Cojoined yes, but distinct.
>
>There doesn't have to a reason for the deception, it may simply be an
>inevitable byproduct of evolutionary processes giving rise to things that
>enhance survival. Whether or not these things are desirable by  our
>understanding is of no consequence to evolution. Brain structure seems like
>that at times also, as if it is a somewhat cobbled together assemblage of
>modules that somehow gets the job done. It doesn't have to be the best way,
>it simply has to better than anything else around.

Correct. if it were already "the best way", then 'learning' would be
superfluous.

>Eg. Cross over effect in
>the CNS, may have facilitated the earlier wiggilng movement of worms etc.
>The only reason it may exist is that is because where all vertebrate
nervous
>systems began ...

Not-True. anything that physically dis-integrates the one
internal-frame-of-reference [IFR] Geometry reduces the
information-processing capacity of the nervous system in question.

>
>
>I was stupid for thinking for that evolution went to any trouble at all ...


Not-True. that Evolutionary dynamics =include= the dynamics of 'learning',
which derives in the way any instance of the biology is 'driven' in
interaction with its external environment, is Verified by the fact that that
which is 'learned' makes a difference with respect to survival propensity.

'learning' constitutes physically-real Work.

hence, Evolutionary dynamics do 'take-pains' in their own unfolding.

the 'pain' [going-through-the-'trouble'] of Doing-Work

k. p. collins

>[...]





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list