No subject


Sun Apr 10 21:34:35 EST 2005


possibly possible to have consiousness with only matter, therefore by
the rastor sollution (or whatever it's called) this is probably the
case. Why do you make this assumption? What is conditional relativity?

>                          Consciousness,
>                          per se,
>                          is a transcendental
>                          continuum
>                          of physical energy.

I'm lost. What is transcendental continuum? What is physical energy?

>                          Each conscious mind
>                          is a transcendental
>                          concatenation
>                          of unique thoughts.

Are you saying consciousness is made up of a series of thoughts? What
about when you still you mind, eg. meditation, are you not concious
then? I don't get the use of transcendental.

>                          Thought
>                          is noncomputational.
>                          Mind
>                          is noncomputational.

Mind is non-computational
Mind = Counsiousness = Counscious Mind
Consiousness = Thought(1) + Through(2) + ...
Mind is not computational
Therefore Thought(n) is not computational

hmm... not exactly logical, but implied.

However I'm doubtfull about your definition of Counsiousness as a series
of thoughts. Where is the evidence/logic behind that statement or was it
made via obseration?

Also how did you decide that thoughts are non-computational, from the
above implication?

>                          Neither thought
>                          nor mind
>                          can be emulated
>                          by a single algorithm.
> 

Why single?

Conclusions 
1. The brain can be emulated
2. Counsiousness can't be emulated
3. Thought can't be emulated

Possibley invalid assumptions Assumptions
1. Mind = Counciousness (though this could just be a matter of
definition)
2. Thoughts are non-computational
3. Consiousness is non-computational
4. Counsiousness is made of up a stream of thoughts


Implications
1. Thoughts are not of the brain
2. We can make AI as long as it isn't consious, or if we want it to be
cousious we simply have to connect it to the "transcendental continuum
of physical energy" or the get it to manipulate "conditional
relativity". (I don't know what these are so may have used them
incorrectly). 
3. It is possible to create AI with a mind, (after all our computatonal
brain is associated with a consiousness, we just need to copy that part
of the brain which is associated with consiousness).



OK, that's about it. BTW I'm not trying to start an argument between
views, I've just been unable to understand the reasons for yours. I'm
interested to hear what you've got to say :)

Cheers,
Keeva.



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list