gee, i was hoping to get a response from folks who hold that the 'engine' of
evolution is 'randomness'.
it's not.
the engine of evolution is the one-way flow of energy from order to disorder
that is what's described by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T].
and, as soon as the ability to 'learn' gets engineered in-there,
experiential dynamics, which are also rigorously-governed by WDB2T, become
an integral 'part' of evolutionary dynamics.
it's why the quality of Educational stuff Matters. better education ~~>
better survival propensity.
it's also why Childhood environment Matters, 'cause that's where Children
'learn' their foundation-stuff.
it's why it's not-True that the "fittest"-biology survives best.
could be that the "fittest"-biology is 'just' born into a
'dung-heap'-environment.
it's why discussions, such as the one you folks're having actually matter -
because evolution advances, right-there, in your 'hands', to the degree that
you folks actually advance the body of Knowledge.
in any discussion, what's actually happening is that folks're doing Work to
'climb' the energy-flow gradient that is WDB2T. the further this gradient is
'climbed', the more evolutionary dynamics become perfected, be-cause the
stuff of your discussion transfers to the body of Knowledge from which folks
can 'learn'.
the 'desire' to 'climb' the WDB2T energy-flow gradient is built-right-into
all nervous systems, BTW.
but, you folks who're discussing 'Consciousness' have to take a few steps
back, and resolve the False-Finitizations [AoK, Ap4] inherent in the
prevailing view of evolutionary dynamics before you can, then, actually
discuss 'Consciousness'.
Sorry.
~~"Don't be disappointed because you've built castles in the air. Build
foundations under them." [i'm not sure who said it, but attribute it to
Lincoln.]
k. p. collins
Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
>>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
>>>[...]
>>
