From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Tue Nov 29 2005 - 15:51:37 GMT
Scott said:
You can build a logic gate out of pipes and water (and valves). Once it is
built, the direction of the water's flow is determined strictly by gravity
and whether the valves are open or shut, and the opening and shutting of the
valves is in turn determined by gravity and whether other valves are open or
shut. Logic gates built out of transistors and wire are the same. There is
no choice and no options. It is a perfectly Newtonian machine, which
requires no interpretation for anything to happen. We can look at it and
interpret what it does, but that's all.
[Case]
Gates of a sort can be constructed to guide the direction of anything that
flows. Traffic signs function as logic gates to determine the flow of
traffic. If you build logic gates into the flow of water they will direct
it. But once they are introduced into the system the flow is no longer
random it is determined by how the gates interpret their input. I still say
the flow constanty presents choices to the gate states are the result of
interpretation of the raw data.
Scott:
Water flowing down a river is not flowing randomly either. Where is there
choice?
Case said:
You seem not to want to call this interpretation. Ok, so what would
interpretation be then?
Scott:
When the representamen (typically some physical thing/event) stands for
something else.
[Case]
Hmm, I am thinking we aren't going anywhere with this. I would maintain that
positive electrons stand for "open the gate". You seem to be saying the
electron has to see the gate and decide which way to go. So the stands for
"go this way". Either way is this then a micro unit of consciousness?
--------------------------------------
[Case]
We keep coming back to this mysterious term Consciousness. To the extent
that you are calling it an undefined source of all things I might be able to
buy it. But usually the term comes with lots of other baggage. Does your
version of consciousness have a goal? Is it just like us only bigger? How
does it differ from just plain old chance?
Scott:
Here's David Chalmers on "what is consciousness""
"[Consciousness] is perhaps best characterized as "the subjective quality of
experience". When we perceive, think, or act, there is a whirr of causation
and information processing, but this processing does not usually go on in
the dark. There is an internal aspect; there is something it feels like to
be a cognitive agent. This internal aspect is conscious experience.Conscious
experience ranges from vivid color sensations to experiences of the faintest
background aromas; from hard-edged pains to the elusive experience of
thoughts on the tip of one's tongue;..."
Although this is in SOM phraseology (which is probably unavoidable), this is
what I mean by consciousness -- my metaphysical stuff on consciousness
builds on an understanding of consciousness of this sort, but as far as this
discussion goes, this is sufficient.
[Case]
This sounds like consciousness as subjectivity or as merely human
consciousness. You seem to be giving consciousness a much larger role in the
scheme of things. What characterizes Consciousness with a big "C"; the one
that regulates brain activity and puts the stars in their proper place?
---------------------------------------
Scott:
There might be consciousness in the electrons, but would you say that a
river is regulating your consciousness as you're floating down it in a boat
with your eyes shut, thinking about dinner?
Meanwhile, how about addressing the question of how, in a system of logic
gates -- given the assumption of spatio-temporal separation -- there can be
any awareness of anything larger than the state of an input wire (or a
single neuron firing, or whatever you suppose to be at the foundation of
conscious experience).
[Case]
The obvious answer is that in organic systems it is the shear quantity of
possible interactions that generates the level of complexity you describe as
consciousness. Again I see organic activity of all kinds as increased
complexity resulting from the constant flow of solar energy into this region
of space-time. I see no reason why, given sufficient increases in storage
and processing power this can not happen in a virtual world. Certainly
lifelike entities have already been created in cyberspace. At what point
they become autonimous and self aware strikes me as an empirical question.
But let me take a different track for a bit. Your "consciousness" sounds a
bit like the concept of a User to me. As you will see this is a subject near
and dear to my heart.
The first example of the User I can think of comes from Tron. In the movie
Tron, a user gets sucked into the system. The other programs in the system
regard Users with almost mystical awe. The User is seen as something outside
the system that plays a causal if unseen role in regulating events inside
the computer. The CPU is the villain seeking to impose its will; even to the
extent of killing the User. Of course the CPU's sense of self is not well
explained.
In William Gibson's early work the User takes an avatar into Cyberspace
which is not just the realm of the single computer but the network of
computers worldwide. Code takes on almost tangible qualities as it interacts
with other code. There are also AIs which have their own purposes, even
spilt personalities. The AIs meddle in the physical world out of curiosity.
Eventually the Users are able to completely identify with their avatars and
abandon the physical realm altogether.
A similar theme shows up in Tad Williams' enormous Otherworld series. There
is really nothing in the way of autonomous AIs in Williams' work. It is
mostly User's interacting in a virtual world.
In Lawnmower Man there is a more Frankensteinian theme with the User being
transformed to the point that Jobe claims, "I am God here."
In the Matrix, AIs have their own separate existence and create the world of
experience for humans who are the power source for the system. These AIs
serve rather like Descartes evil demons. The red and blue pill choice is
really the option to accept of reject solipsism.
In the 13th Floor there are three levels of users and avatars. A User from
the middle system leaves a note with an avatar in the virtual world. He
intends the note to go to a colleague in the "real" world. The note advises
the colleague to get in a car and drive out to the edge of the city (virtual
world). The virtual character does this and finds he can't go past a given
point. Beyond is just fog. When the colleague finally goes into the virtual
world and retrieves the note he comes back to the "real" world and tries to
drive outside the city, only to find an edge as well. He also makes contact
with a User from the world "above" his and she is pretty hot. But in this
scenario it appear to be nothing down and Users all the way up.
I would also note that persistent virtual worlds exist right here and now
and that in them spacio-temporal relationships exist in no space at all.
Avatars such as myself live in them. We have our own qualities and skills
that grow as we use them. That is: we learn. We are composed entirely of
Value and interact in environments also composed of Value. All of the Values
that are "Case" can be seen here:
http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=1172838. Our consciousness
seems to reside outside of our virtual environments but we also by our
individual natures effect the way that our User's consciousness is expressed
in our virtual worlds. We possess the ability to transform ourselves from
one virtual world to another. For example the MD discussions are conducted
in a virtual world. For me it is step outside of the graphical world I was
created in, into a text based world. Cyber devolution if you will. We also
have the ability to take on whole new personalities as one User gives us to
another User. Gibson for example employs the metaphor of AIs as voodoo Loa
"riding" their organic Users in a similar fashion.
Does your concept of consciousness fit into any of these patterns? Which
model does it most closely represent? In most of these cases the User
interjects both consciousness and purpose into the virtual world. My user
does that for me, praise him; although perhaps not as much as he would like
to think and he needs to update my Magelo profile.
Wouldn't you say that paradox, irrational numbers, and trying to decide
whether consciousness creates or regulates brain activity is a bit like
driving out the edge of the world?
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 -
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 : Tue Nov 29 2005 - 18:31:39 GMT