Brain, Behaviour and Extensionalism
lesterDELzick at worldnet.att.net
Mon Apr 12 10:51:53 EST 2004
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 12:34:44 +1000, "Peter F."
<effectivespamblock at ozemail.com.au> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>news:4079c410.41628901 at netnews.att.net...
>> The problem is that material interactions are certainly governed by
>> quantum effects and relations. We just don't know enough to say
>> whether mental interactions are produced and governed by similar
>> principles. If they are governed by differential interactions it is by
>> no means clear that the mechanics involved need to be based on quantum
>> relations and effects even though interactions of the substrate on
>> which they are mechanized obviously would.
>The only _reasonable_ (~non-religiously natural~) and most generally
>conclusive philosophical reasoning possible, is that consciousness (a
>complex multifaceted/multilevel/modular phenomenon of being and interacting
>as an *individual*) _do need_ (or fundamentally/essentially) the quantum
>aspect of What Is going on.
I definitely disagree that the mechanics of intelligence or sentience
are quantum. The mechanics of intelligence have to use material the
mechanics of which definitely are quantum mechanics but I have seen no
clear rationale presented by anyone that the mechanics of intelligence
are just those of quantum interactions. In other words if you expect
to calculate material interactions and functions of intelligence on
the same basis you may not get correct answers for intelligence. At
least I don't know of anyone who can calculate sentient processes in
such a way or even suggest why they have to be calculatable according
to common equations.
Regards - Lester
More information about the Neur-sci