RE: On naturalism and consciousness
September 1, 2014 at 6:40 pm
(This post was last modified: September 1, 2014 at 6:57 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(September 1, 2014 at 3:17 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Different clock values represent different states.The only states for the simplest timer are 1 or 0. It's 1 when pulsing, o when not - no matter how many times it pulses (and the program counter shifts) the output of the clock is identical (which is the input for the larger system of a program counter), the output of the system is not. It's different as often as we build it to be. A comparator can tyake a 1/0 signal and parcel it out based on any abstraction. Call it "signal strength" - and you can get a great many outputs from a single input (or vv) There's a practical limit, generally.
Quote:But that's not the point. You've identified a lot of outputs that we as people would identify as important.All in an effort to help -people- understand, yeah. There are tons that don't seem intuitively important to us. But I digress.
Quote:As a practical view of AI, I think your model works very well. However, as a philosophical expression of reality, it seems too anthropocentric and arbitrary. It's one thing for you to define a gate, but how would the mind-spawning universe define it?There's nothing anthropocentric about it. I'm describing gates of a particular architecture and why they behave the way that they do. We aren't made of that type of gate - all that applies is principle. It's about as far from arbitrary as it -can be- largely because of the subject matter. I'm not proposing that we are -actually- logic gates, but that whatever we are uses the same principles (or a convincing approximation of those principles). That's what computational theory of mind is all about - not finding chipsets in the human head, though, admittedly, it would be convenient if we did find that. Perhaps it seems arbitrary to you because the application of those principles are broad (as part of the nature of the principles)?
I don;t know how such a thing would define anything (as I'm not such a thing). Perhaps you should ask the mind spawning universe that question? I'm a patient man....we might not get the answer back to quick on that count, eh?
The question, if my model works well as a practical view of AI, is whether or not it might also have something to say about our intelligence. We're back to what the difference between AI as in artificial, and AI as in actual - could be? If there's a difference, it doesn't seem like it would be the effect. More like a difference in process. Would you agree to that?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
