ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th November 2017, 12:38 PM   #161
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
That doesn't make it not true. Simulation-theory is popular. Cosmology is also approaching a dead-end by postulating a huge multiverse of universes that is, in principle, impossible to verify.

What is this nonsense.

Just because we do not have the means or technology to verify something today does not mean it is impossible.
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2017, 01:42 PM   #162
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,500
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
What is this nonsense.

Just because we do not have the means or technology to verify something today does not mean it is impossible.
If they're causally disconnected from us, it's impossible to detect them.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2017, 09:30 PM   #163
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,544
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Careful, Fudbucker. You're perilously close to falling into the philosophical dead-end of solipsism.
It's not actually a dead-end; it's just incorrect. There is a disproof of solipsism.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2017, 09:42 PM   #164
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,544
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
You're assuming reality is materialistic. That is an assumption that could obviously be wrong.
It could be except that this can be proven.

Quote:
That's an interesting word. It implies there is some understanding of how the brain generates consciousness, yet you said you "have no idea".
I have some understanding.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 07:59 AM   #165
jrhowell
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 267
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
There is a disproof of solipsism.
I don't believe that solipsism leads to any useful conclusions, but I have yet to see an actual proof that it is false. Could you share a link?
jrhowell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 01:57 PM   #166
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
I don't believe that solipsism leads to any useful conclusions, but I have yet to see an actual proof that it is false. Could you share a link?

I'd be interested to see that also. Be a bit like proving the non existence of gods I imagine.
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2017, 09:02 PM   #167
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
You could say the same about the actions of neurons, with some other chemicals tossed in, of course. Indidividual neurons simply are reacting. They can't sense anything. It's the collection of all these specific neuron activities that results in consciousness, so the story goes. Why can't the same be said for plants?
No, single neurons do not sense anything on an individual basis - that is correct. Collections of neurons connected to specific kinds of cells sense things.

Plants do not have neurons, or anything like them, nor do they have the specific cells. If they can be described to be "sensing", then their kind of "sensing" is so different from our kind of sensing that it barely even deserves to be designated by the same word.

Sensing happens in brains. Plants do not have brains. Plants do not sense.
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2017, 12:53 AM   #168
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,834
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
That doesn't make it not true. Simulation-theory is popular. Cosmology is also approaching a dead-end by postulating a huge multiverse of universes that is, in principle, impossible to verify.
It was proved this year that we aren't living in a simulation. Science moves on.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2017, 05:17 AM   #169
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,666
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It was proved this year that we aren't living in a simulation. Science moves on.
I hadn't heard of this one. Looked it up. Probably over my head, but it sounds like it has more than enough room for the fuds among us to blithely continue their weird:
"They discovered that the complexity of the simulation increased exponentially with the number of particles being simulated.

.. If, however, the complexity grows on an exponential scale – where the amount of computing power has to double every time a single particle is added – then the task quickly becomes impossible.

The researchers calculated that just storing information about a couple of hundred electrons would require a computer memory that would physically require more atoms than exist in the universe.

..

And given the physically impossible amount of computer grunt needed to store information for just one member of this subset, fears that we might be unknowingly living in some vast version of The Matrix can now be put to rest.

There is a caveat to this conclusion: if our universe is a simulation, there is no reason that the laws of physics should apply outside it. In the words of Zohar Ringel, the lead author of the paper, “Who knows what are the computing capabilities of whatever simulates us?”
FROM https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/p...ter-simulation

The closing line by the author is the loose, flappy bit.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2017, 11:32 PM   #170
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,500
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
No, single neurons do not sense anything on an individual basis - that is correct. Collections of neurons connected to specific kinds of cells sense things.

Plants do not have neurons, or anything like them, nor do they have the specific cells. If they can be described to be "sensing", then their kind of "sensing" is so different from our kind of sensing that it barely even deserves to be designated by the same word.

Sensing happens in brains. Plants do not have brains. Plants do not sense.
How? And if you don't know how, how can you rule out plants? Do you think collections of neurons are the only things than can 'sense'? And that word is not very precise.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 01:12 AM   #171
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,544
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
I don't believe that solipsism leads to any useful conclusions, but I have yet to see an actual proof that it is false. Could you share a link?
No, not until I publish knowledge theory.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 01:15 AM   #172
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,544
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
How? And if you don't know how, how can you rule out plants? Do you think collections of neurons are the only things than can 'sense'? And that word is not very precise.
I can rule out plants and collections of single cell organisms and fungus. They are not conscious. Neither are arthropods, round worms or flat worms. With mollusks, that only seems possible with larger squid, octopus, and perhaps cuttlefish. Coral, sea anemones, and jellyfish are also not conscious.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 06:05 AM   #173
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,666
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
No, not until I publish knowledge theory.
You really don't help the general case by premature intellectualization...
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 06:48 AM   #174
jrhowell
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 267
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
There is a disproof of solipsism.
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
No, not until I publish knowledge theory.
This brings to mind the phrase "put up or shut up".
jrhowell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 06:58 AM   #175
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 301
Originally Posted by Donn View Post
I hadn't heard of this one. Looked it up. Probably over my head, but it sounds like it has more than enough room for the fuds among us to blithely continue their weird:
"They discovered that the complexity of the simulation increased exponentially with the number of particles being simulated.

.. If, however, the complexity grows on an exponential scale – where the amount of computing power has to double every time a single particle is added – then the task quickly becomes impossible.

The researchers calculated that just storing information about a couple of hundred electrons would require a computer memory that would physically require more atoms than exist in the universe.

..

And given the physically impossible amount of computer grunt needed to store information for just one member of this subset, fears that we might be unknowingly living in some vast version of The Matrix can now be put to rest.

There is a caveat to this conclusion: if our universe is a simulation, there is no reason that the laws of physics should apply outside it. In the words of Zohar Ringel, the lead author of the paper, “Who knows what are the computing capabilities of whatever simulates us?”
FROM https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/p...ter-simulation

The closing line by the author is the loose, flappy bit.

I've only gone through your summary here (thanks for that, and thanks to Darat for mentioning this! -- had heard a while back that they're apparently 'testing' this weird simulation hypothesis in all seriousness), and haven't read the article proper, but surely this assumes that the only way that one can, well, compute, is the way we do it?

Wouldn't we have concluded something similar some decades back, back when we apparently had these huge mainframes or whatever (which I haven't seen myself, only read about and seen pics of), if people were discussing simulations (and general computer applications) that are routinely carried out today?

(I remember this Isaac Asimov sci fi, a short story, where some huge computer, multivac or something, initially had to be upgraded by inceasing its size to crazy levels. Until it finally moves off into hyperspace. And re-creates the world. Whatever. The point is, he couldn't conceive of our present day computers back then, and had to increase the capacity of his fictitious computer by increasing its physical size. Before invoking the near-supernatural "hyperspace".)

Isn't this more of the same, simple extrapolation of current trends? (Or perhaps it isn't. Just thinking aloud. I haven't read the article proper.)
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 07:02 AM   #176
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,832
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
(I remember this Isaac Asimov sci fi, a short story, where some huge computer, multivac or something, initially had to be upgraded by inceasing its size to crazy levels. Until it finally moves off into hyperspace. And re-creates the world. Whatever. The point is, he couldn't conceive of our present day computers back then, and had to increase the capacity of his fictitious computer by increasing its physical size. Before invoking the near-supernatural "hyperspace".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Question
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 07:15 AM   #177
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 301
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post

Yep, that's the one! Read it ages and ages and ages back, but I remember the last line, "Let there be light!"
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 09:22 AM   #178
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,666
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
Isn't this more of the same, simple extrapolation of current trends? (Or perhaps it isn't. Just thinking aloud. I haven't read the article proper.)
Nor have I, but that last line sure put a hole in their argument. Sheesh!
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 09:29 AM   #179
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,544
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
This brings to mind the phrase "put up or shut up".
Actually that brings to mind the phrase, "I double dog dare you." Alas, I'm not 8 years old.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 12:46 PM   #180
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
How? And if you don't know how, how can you rule out plants? Do you think collections of neurons are the only things than can 'sense'? And that word is not very precise.

Oh sure, plants may be able to see, smell, and hear without any eyes, nose, or ears to do it with do you think? ...... ........ But hang on, having those sensing organs is only part of the story, the information must be fed into a brain to sort it out. We have a good idea how this stuff works in the body of animals. We know that damage to the sensing organ, connecting nerves, and part of the brain that deals with the incoming info, does effect the ability to sense.

How about you give us a theory about how it may work in eyeless, noseless, earless, brainless, plants?
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 12:54 PM   #181
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
This brings to mind the phrase "put up or shut up".

I recall barehl saying he could not publish whist Trump was in power.
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 01:24 PM   #182
jrhowell
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 267
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
Actually that brings to mind the phrase, "I double dog dare you." Alas, I'm not 8 years old.
Ok. I expected: "I have discovered a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition that this forum is too narrow to contain."
jrhowell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2017, 06:47 PM   #183
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,117
How Conjoined Twins Are Making Scientists Question the Concept of Self

Quote:
When they were about a year and a half,” says Felicia Hogan, “we got told it was impossible to separate them without harming or killing one.” Her eleven-year-old girls, Krista and Tatiana, are conjoined at the skull, making them craniopagus twins. Craniopagus twins are the rarest sort—only about 6 percent of conjoined people fall into that category. But the Hogan girls are rarer still because their skulls are not merely fused—instead, they form a single continuous cranium which houses four cerebral hemispheres.
https://thewalrus.ca/how-conjoined-t...ncept-of-self/
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 01:11 PM   #184
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
How Conjoined Twins Are Making Scientists Question the Concept of Self



https://thewalrus.ca/how-conjoined-t...ncept-of-self/

Very interesting Joe.

Quote:
However, even before they left the hospital, they noticed something extraordinary about their girls’ behavior: when a pacifier was placed in one infant’s mouth, the other would stop crying.

mri scans later revealed that each girl’s thalamus is connected to the other’s via a “thalamic bridge” that shuttles blood and brain activity back and forth. The thalamus acts as a hub for sensory information, so the girls are able to “tune in” to each other’s experiences.

One must wonder at the possibilities this may open up, for future communication between separate brains, and possibly even downloading of one persons life experience into another. Is a kind of immortality in sight?
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 01:13 PM   #185
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,117
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
One must wonder at the possibilities this may open up, for future communication between separate brains, and possibly even downloading of one persons life experience into another. Is a kind of immortality in sight?
On a long enough time frame assuming we as a species last long enough, I'd say it's inevitable.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 11:26 PM   #186
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,848
Do we need to understand, if increasing consicióusness or mental power or brain size is àn adaptation not primarily natural. Probably, decreasing energy use on natural physical works or increased easy energy intakes is the reason to it.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 11:49 PM   #187
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
How?
You want me to go get a 10-year medical degree with a speciality in neurology?

We know sensing happens in brains, because we've seen it happen in fMRI studies. We know it happens in brains, because when you destroy certain bits of brains, the senses can be impaired. We know it doesn't happen in other tissue, because we don't see that kind of tissue react in fMRI studies and when you destroy other kinds of tissue, the senses aren't impaired in the same ways.

Sensing happens in brains. If you still doubt this, then you are profoundly ignorant about what scientists know about how brains work.

Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
And if you don't know how, how can you rule out plants? Do you think collections of neurons are the only things than can 'sense'? And that word is not very precise.
Yes, I think that collections of neurons are the only things that can sense - as opposed to react. Any old stuff can react. Minerals can react. But they can't sense.
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 11:51 PM   #188
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Do we need to understand, if increasing consicióusness or mental power or brain size is àn adaptation not primarily natural. Probably, decreasing energy use on natural physical works or increased easy energy intakes is the reason to it.
Please define what you mean by "increasing" consciousness. Also, "increasing" mental power. Also, "mental power".
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 02:28 AM   #189
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,848
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Please define what you mean by "increasing" consciousness. Also, "increasing" mental power. Also, "mental power".
Bigger Brains: Complex Brains for a Complex World


Quote:
Endocasts of Homo erectus, (left) and Homo sapiens (right)
Endocasts of Homo erectus (left) and Homo sapiens (right) illustrate rapid increase in brain size.
As early humans faced new environmental challenges and evolved bigger bodies, they evolved larger and more complex brains.
Large, complex brains can process and store a lot of information. That was a big advantage to early humans in their social interactions and encounters with unfamiliar habitats.

Over the course of human evolution, brain size tripled. The modern human brain is the largest and most complex of any living primate.
http://humanorigins.si.edu/human-characteristics/brains
As indicative above, whatever related to brain should be increasing Should be consiousness also. Since it is evolutionary changes, somewhere it is also indicated, lesser energy requirement for doing physical activities(eating cooked foods, using eases, luxury etc.) ( I assume more energy intake and absorption) can be responsible for increasing brain size and its impacts.

Following quote also indicate it:

Quote:
Role of cooking in human evolution[edit]
Richard Wrangham, professor of biological anthropology at Harvard University,[47] proposes that cooked food played a pivotal role in human evolution. Evidence of a cooked diet, according to Wrangham, can be seen as far back as 1.8 million years ago in the anatomical adaptations of Homo erectus. Reduction in the size of teeth and jaw in H. erectus indicate a softer diet, requiring less chewing time. This combined with a smaller gut and larger brain indicate to Wrangham that H. erectus was eating a higher quality diet than its predecessors.[48] To explain a decreased gut providing the amount of energy required for an increased brain size, Wrangham links his research on the digestive effects of cooked versus raw foods with the lower reproductive abilities of female raw foodists, and BMI in both sexes, to support his hypothesis that cooked starches provided the energy necessary to fuel evolution from H. erectus to H. sapiens.[49]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_fo...uman_evolution
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.

Last edited by Kumar; 14th November 2017 at 03:00 AM. Reason: add
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 02:07 PM   #190
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,500
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
You want me to go get a 10-year medical degree with a speciality in neurology?

We know sensing happens in brains, because we've seen it happen in fMRI studies. We know it happens in brains, because when you destroy certain bits of brains, the senses can be impaired. We know it doesn't happen in other tissue, because we don't see that kind of tissue react in fMRI studies and when you destroy other kinds of tissue, the senses aren't impaired in the same ways.

Sensing happens in brains. If you still doubt this, then you are profoundly ignorant about what scientists know about how brains work.

Yes, I think that collections of neurons are the only things that can sense - as opposed to react. Any old stuff can react. Minerals can react. But they can't sense.
So no possibility of conscious machines in your worldview?
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 03:40 PM   #191
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
So no possibility of conscious machines in your worldview?
I've answered that question before. If a machine were made that had the complexity of a human brain and nervous system, and if it were connected to inputs of sufficient quality, and with an energy requirement that could realistically be provided, then yes, I think that it's inevitable that such a machine would exhibit consciousness.

However, human technology is so far from this point that it's almost irrelevant.

And needless to say, plants are not there either. There's no structure in a plant that is analogous to even the simplest animal nervous system.
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!

Last edited by arthwollipot; 14th November 2017 at 03:42 PM.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 07:00 AM   #192
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,848
It need to be understood, how consicióusness and intelligence is the consequence of evolutionary changes. Can it be at the cost of loosing some physical body strength. Primatives appear to be more physically strong but less mentaly strong. Óbiously, if wé want to do less physical àctivity, we may need to manipulàte mentaly to fullfil our needs.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 08:20 AM   #193
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,666
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
It need to be understood, how consicióusness and intelligence is the consequence of evolutionary changes. Can it be at the cost of loosing some physical body strength. Primatives appear to be more physically strong but less mentaly strong. Óbiously, if wé want to do less physical àctivity, we may need to manipulàte mentaly to fullfil our needs.
Nó.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 01:13 PM   #194
Thor 2
Master Poster
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 2,930
Hey, Kumar may have something here. Conversely those that devote their time to developing physical strength, body builders, do come over as a bit thick sometimes.
__________________
There are billions of gods. One or more in the mind of every theist.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 04:02 PM   #195
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
"Primitives"?

Oh boy.
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 06:05 PM   #196
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,500
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I've answered that question before. If a machine were made that had the complexity of a human brain and nervous system, and if it were connected to inputs of sufficient quality, and with an energy requirement that could realistically be provided, then yes, I think that it's inevitable that such a machine would exhibit consciousness.

However, human technology is so far from this point that it's almost irrelevant.

And needless to say, plants are not there either. There's no structure in a plant that is analogous to even the simplest animal nervous system.
That doesn't square with
Quote:
yes, I think that collections of neurons are the only things that can sense
So which is it?
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2017, 11:51 PM   #197
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,218
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
That doesn't square with

So which is it?
They are entirely consistent. "Collections of neurons are the only things that can sense" is in the present tense. My speculations about machine consciousness are referring to a possible future. In such a future, machine components would be essentially indistinguishable from collections of neurons. But again, it is speculation and not reality. I can't see the future. Can you?
__________________
Read my fantasy novel for free!
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 02:27 AM   #198
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,848
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
"Primitives"?

Oh boy.
Sorry, Primates or early human. looks quite physically strong.

__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 02:38 AM   #199
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,848
Originally Posted by Donn View Post
Nó.
Then what? There seems to be a competition between physical body and mental body?
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2017, 02:46 AM   #200
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,666
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Then what? There seems to be a competition between physical body and mental body?
2
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.