From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 - 11:18:25 BST
Jos,
On the brain physiology point ...
I still say we can have the debate without physiological details,
provided we both accept that ...
Physiological brain structure exist atomically - arrangements of
individual cells - and topologically - arrangements of collections,
patterns and structures.
Some aspects are inherited (genetically),
Some are congenital (develop in the womb)
Some structure even develop during "training" in life (cultural).
And other kinds of learning, knowledge acquisition etc, do not produce
physiological structure changes, but electrochemical state changes.)
That's the model I work with anyway.
Ian
On 9/5/05, Laycock, Jos (OSPT) <Jos.Laycock@offsol.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:
> Hi Ian
>
> This is a reasonable point, but my only reason for wanting to talk about
> additional complexity was because it is very easy to discount things as
> biological hard wiring and in doing so rule biology out of and "mind"
> discussions. My assertion is that consciousness is a part of the biological
> SPOVs that are physiological brain. If you don't want to debate brain
> physiology then you don't want to debate (my version of) consciousness.
>
> P.S, Reading back my comments, I find them insultingly condescending, please
> be aware that Friday afternoons are not completely alcohol free, and most
> things posted after about 3pm should only be read through the bottom of a
> pint glass.
>
> Cheers Ian
>
> Jos
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of ian glendinning
> Sent: 04 September 2005 10:20
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of
>
>
> Wow, great thread of responses - but I'm going to have to find time to
> come back.
>
> Jos, for the record when I was saying "neuron" - I'm really just using
> it as shorthand for the physiological structures of the brain and the
> physiological states of those structures - I appreciate the brain is
> more complex - just didn't see this as the place to debate brain
> anatomy in detail - I'm no brain surgeon.
>
> I'll come back.
> Ian
>
> On 9/2/05, Laycock, Jos (OSPT) <Jos.Laycock@offsol.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:
> > Ian
> >
> > comments embedded,
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> > [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of ian glendinning
> > Sent: 02 September 2005 12:01
> > To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> > Subject: Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of
> >
> >
> > Hi Jos,
> >
> > You are talking about terrestrial animalian consciousness in your
> > definition based on neuronal evolution (that's pragmatic, but probaby
> > not exclusively true). And you are only taking about the consciousness
> > wired into the neurons (at birth and during some kinds of
> > life-learning). So far as that goes I completely agree. With that
> > limited definition, I like your idea of saying it's restricted to the
> > biological level.
> >
> > These caveats were absolutely intended as preconditions to my poorly
> > referenced drivelings.
> >
> > My problem is I think that is only part of consciousness
> >
> > Agree but IMO, not intellect.
> >
> > (and
> > intellect), and I'm certain other things known, experienced, learned,
> > believed communicated are in the information patterns captured in the
> > neuronal patterns, not in the patterns in the neurons themselves. (It
> > would be an interesting conclusion I've not discounted yet if ALL
> > information, genetic and memetic, ended up in the neurons, but if it
> > did, I'd be tempted to say neurons were above being purely biological,
> > but that's another story).
> >
> > Forget neurons if you want to know who is watching, look at glial cells,
> > have a google at Arthur Butt (he's not interested in consciousness but his
> > findings make me seriously question the importance of neurones.)
> >
> > I completely buy your model of patterns written on top of patterns,
> > but that does not mean that the informatioin the higher pattern exists
> > in the lower pattern, yes ?
> >
> > Yes, but in unrefined form that is invisible to the involved observer.
> >
> > (My working model is that neuronal connectivity patterns represent the
> > kinds of information and relationships we can process, but not all the
> > individual instances known - those instances are in the states of the
> > neurons - but I could be wrong.)
> >
> > Neural connectivity patterns have very little to do with information
> > processing - look to long term potentiation at individual synapses.
> > NCP's (ooh! new jargon) define the framework within which any individual's
> > maximal potential processing capacity can reside, but as none of us get
> > anywhere near capacity in that sense, I really can't comment on whether
> they
> > can accommodate all instances known.
> > Aside from that, what you suggest is absolutely correct, so nice to be on
> > home turf) the states of neurones are governed by their environments, they
> > react in slavish fashion to the digital signals received from other
> neurones
> > but also receive analogue signals via endocrine signalling from other
> > neurones and glial cells.
> >
> > In order to make progress I'm trying to encourage some debate on what
> > kinds of consciousness and intellect we think we're talking about. The
> > problem is lumping it all together and thinking we can have a
> > meaningful conversation with a single thing called consciousness (or
> > intellect) as the subject of sentences.
> >
> > I agree with this and my ideas here seem to be pointing to various strata
> of
> > awareness, at the biological level we have "consciousness" and I am happy
> > with this, but at higher levels?
> >
> > cultural level - mob rule
> >
> > intellectual level - intellect.
> >
> > Bollocks this is really weak, our terms are not properly defined.
> >
> > Help!
> >
> >
> > Jos
> >
> >
> > Ian
> > Forget the (Metaphorical) Material, Cherchez L'Information - Ian
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 07 2005 - 03:14:09 BST