Brain, Behaviour and Extensionalism

Bouh at Bouh at
Sun Apr 11 17:13:45 EST 2004

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:29:41 GMT, lesterDELzick at
(Lester Zick) wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:08:20 +1000, "Peter F."
><effectivespamblock at> in wrote:
>><Bouh> wrote in message news:ndbg701bj7q26e4d4rel0j1o9456u8fn5d at
>>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:14:07 +0100, David Longley
>>> But there is a little misunderstanding: I've never said that QM played
>>> a role in intelligence. It might or might not. I don't know. But I
>>> don't rule out the possibility.
>>Nor should you rule it out, IMO.
>>Anyone contemplating carefully (and commenting reasonably) from a broadly
>>science aligned/informed position of overview, will have to conclude that
>>quantuum world (aspect of 'What Is going on') is fundamental to any and
>>every aspect of how we are.
>This is incorrect. We cannot exclude quantum effects as the mechanical
>basis for sentience. But there is no justification for concluding that
>such effects are definitely the mechanical basis for sentience without
>comprehending the mechanics of sentience.

In fact, DL says, in a way, that his experiments ( and day to day work
) don't need a functional basis other than behaviour at the highest
level ( human or animal behaviour ). I guess he gets enough
"significant" results but the problem is that he's just studying
behaviour, not intelligence. Most of the tasks we perform don't
require real intelligence ( make coffee, drive a car, play tennis...
). But even while performing these stupid tasks, the brain reacts with
such a blazing speed that it wouldn't astonish me if QM plays a
functional role. Now, of course, it has to be said that Peter is also
right in the sense that since all matter and energy follows the rules
of QM, everything scientifically known to man depends on it ( it was a
message I tried to send to DL for some time, without being able to
express it as clearly )

>>It does not matter if we cannot yet (_or_ never) experimentally correlate
>>anything that we might mean by consciousness (or 'mentally or motorially
>>manifest behaviour', for that matter) with observations of 'quantuum-weird
>>world' made in the field of fundamental physical science.
>>And one last thing:
>>Human consciousness (however people like to think about it or explain it)
>>has nothing to do with the fact that plants and animals, and geological and
>>astrophysical events, got fossilized (in various ways) for us to find that
>>they did; _Only_ us finding out _that_ it all did does.
>Regards - Lester

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list