Consciousness, New Thinking About
jgcasey at hotkey.net.au
Mon Jun 17 16:12:07 EST 2002
Would the pc clients hardware be brains? What is the hardware
of the server? That is what kind of brain would the conscious
entity have in this analogy?
"DJ" <DJ at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$zg1sxg$puh$1 at maggie.netlink.com.au...
> tony.jeffs <tonyjeffs2 at REMOVEaol.com> wrote in message
> news:WAIO8.1308$sv5.86493 at newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> > "DJ" <DJ at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:newscache$mr0rxg$gn2$1 at maggie.netlink.com.au...
> > > Hmmm... Maybe each of us is a different "instance" of the same
> > > entity. Nonetheless real both physically and mentally. Unique,
> > individual
> > > consciousness might result from "filtering" that single conscious
> > > through each unique physical entity. This possibility raises the
> > > of how each individual consciousness is able to interact with the
> > > conscious entity. In computing terms, can they update eachother's
> > > Sorry, I'm just pissing into the wind too.
> > >
> > > DJ
> > I like the shared consciousness view because it seems simpler, but does
> > actually mean anything?
> > Myself and a colleague's pc are on the same central hard disk drive.
> > ==equivalent to one consciousness- or does it?.
> > Butsince we have our own passwords, and sharing some server management
> > software, we can't access each other's files or front-end software, so
> > effectively have two independant systems, equating to two independant
> > consciousnesses.
> I think that your analogy of running the same software on two separate
> machines (each with different physical characteristics) is a useful one.
> The physical characteristics of each client PC will determine how the
> program performs, providing each with a unique experience. To improve the
> analogy I would have the same program running on a server simultaneously.
> The server software (including data) is continuously broadcast to all
> clients. The client PCs, because of their physical limitations, cannot
> all of the software.
> Stretching the analogy a bit (no, a lot!) further...the clients notify the
> server about each event (eg keyboard input). Each client maintains a
> of its events in the form of index entries in its own - unreliable -
> If a client PC needs to recall/retrieve a particular event, it can use an
> index entry as a "key", thereby giving it access to the appropriate part
> the continuously broadcast server software. Advanced clients are able to
> store simulated events (thoughts) wholly, but imperfectly, within their
> memory. During memory retrieval these can override and confuse the
> retrieval of real events.
> Under this scenario you and your colleague do have independent
> consciousnesses, but at all times you are both dependent on the existence
> the server. You can be aware of the same events (imagine the PCs share
> same modem). You might be able to be aware of events that you haven't
> personally experienced (using ESP) if you can somehow manage to create the
> appropriate keys.
> Hope this helps,
More information about the Neur-sci