... will they destroy all great pieces of religious art?.
just finished watching monuments men.
great movie!
Go to bethel...... spend a month living by their rules for an idea of how it may be under big brothers government.
I had a music cd from the film the matrix, it was in a huge cd rack, it was picked out as one track was by marylin manson.
A housekeeper had 'happened' by it, tucked away in my cd rack.
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
Why not ask a question instead of answering my question.
For the third time now.....
What is missing from input, processing and output...that you feel consciousness requires?
I see no missing element provided by biological, material means. I see no room or requirement for a soul or anything to meet the definition of conscious,
As for your question, as I have said several times, it is a theory, we have never designed a computer with that aim. No your dell is not conscious. No my ipad is not conscious.
No I made clear I do not believe there is a concept of 'levels' of consciousness so no my computer is not somewhat conscious or less conscious. It has not been built to replicate a conscious organism, it has been built to send emails and watch Froch beat Groves via live streaming. However as I said in my first reply, I do believe we would and could see A.I. soon... a 'conscious' technology.
Again seraphim, the fourth time, in the hope you answer it....
What is missing in INPUT, PROCESSING and OUTPUT, that we know the brain can achieve through physiology alone, that would require an outside source for or any source other than biological....to have 'consciousness'. Again, what is missing from the natural?
Self aware and aware of the external...we are...we can see we are alive, on a planet, with a finite existence and with dangers to our existence. We can see we are one of many animals, many of our own species. We survive, interact and procreate and ALL with biological means.
So a fifth time, this time with bold and highlighting.....
What is missing from the simple, materialistic.......input, processing and output....... to produce 'consciousness'?
http://o.canada.com/news/national/blood-transfusions.
thoughts?.
So I was certified for blood sampling and blood transfusing on friday.
Here was an interesting fact, that last data on incidents with blood for the UK is 2012, there were 6 people in the Uk given the wrong blood type in the whole country and none died.
There were a total of 9 deaths the whole of that year due to blood, 6 due to volume overload (heart failed and were given too much fluid...not the blood itself). Have a read yourselves...
Keep in mind there are 8000 transfusions A DAY in the uk....
Deaths n=9 (8 in 2011)
Transfusion-associated graft versus host disease (TA-GvHD) n=1 imputability 3 (none since 2000-2001) A fetus with anaemia related to maternal parvovirus received an intrauterine transfusion with maternal blood (non-irradiated, non-leucodepleted and HLA-related) and died from TA-GvHD three months after birth.
Unclassifiable complications of transfusion (UCT) n=1 imputability 2 (1 in 2011)
One patient died after receiving intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) that led to severe haemolysis and renal failure. An additional possible case of TRALI was reported in relation to IVIg contributing to morbidity.
Haemolytic transfusion reactions (HTR) n=1 imputability 2 (0 in 2011)
A man with myelodysplastic syndrome developed jaundice and died 8 days after a transfusion and was found to have anti-Jk a (undetectable before transfusion) that contributed to the death of an already sick man.
Transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) n=6 (2 in 2011)
1 of these was ‘likely’ – imputability 2. This was a woman of low body weight transfused to a Hb of 176 g/L; 5 other deaths were classified as ‘possibly’ related to the transfusion – imputability 1.
you maintained a level of personal decency and integrity that you almost certainly would not have had if you had chosen another direction.. sure, you would have had some very "colorful" friends and experiences if you had gone another way, but you still chose the more "edgy" people in the congregation as your friends and you still enjoyed yourself, even if there were a lot of phony constraints.. you looked for ways to be of value to others.
don't stop doing that!.
you kept the darker side of your personality in check.
...we are the fish that got away.....
Thank Zeus then drink, be merry and marry.....
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
But we have designed computers to send emails and watch porn, not replicate consciousness. Of course your dell is not 'conscious'.
Consciousness is a self awareness and awareness of beyond the self.
We could build a computer and give it input and ouput, such as cameras for visual input and speakers, robotic limbs for output. We could program it to process all the input, we could program it to mimic, we could program it for reward and punishments, just as we do with hormones, with reward being offered for,behaviour that promotes survival and punishment for anti social behaviour. We could program it to seek patterns and we could program it to seek acceptance from peers, which it could learn from facial expressions etc, etc, etc, etc, etc......
Once we turned it on..... it would function as we would.
To be conscious is to be nothing more than switched on, to be functioning.
What exactly would be missing from such a computer, that you would call consciousness?
We are nothing more than that computer as far as I can see. There is nothing missing between the hardware and software and to what you call consciousness.
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
" Consciousness/awareness is something more than information itself I would say"
Based on what? Gut feeling?
How is it more than the sum of input and the processing of the input?
... will they destroy all great pieces of religious art?.
just finished watching monuments men.
great movie!
I wonder what the world will do with Rolf's art?
my dad came into the jw's because someone studied the "creation" book with him.
it pains me deeply that he sent me an e-mail recently saying that to keep the peace with my mom, he will stop communicating with me as much as possible.
i should communicate with him only if i have an emergency.. it upsets me to no end, but i cannot do anything or much about it.
That book is the most dishonest book they ever made.... read the great websites made that highlight the quote alterations, it is SHAMEFUL.
http://www.27bslash6.com/easter.html.
.
made me laugh out loud..... .
http://www.27bslash6.com/easter.html
made me laugh out loud.....
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
seraphim, it is very different to say that we cant ascribe consciousness to the brain and.... it is a very difficult thing, to ascribe consciousness to the brain.
It isnt that the brain couldn't do it, or could... it is just knowing how to go about proving it either way to a level of certainty is almost impossible in 2014.
This has led some to assume consciousness is non materialistic because of the problem, but that is just as untrue as me claiming it is purely materialistic... because we cant be sure either way because of the restrictions of testing the theory.
I for one have no issue with the brain having the senses and processing power to have what we consider a conscious thought process. I don't see the big issue in the concept at all, though I do respect the difficulty in proving its mechanism.
I do believe we will see conscious technology, A.I. that will help prove that input and processing can indeed lead to what we would consider conscious.
It is an interesting topic, but you can't make such claims seraphim, neither can the materialists.
As for how I see consciousness seraphim, We have input of vision, hearing, smell, touch and taste.....these are processed and linked together via memories i.e. neurons. We have processing power in the brain that can contemplate these inputs, it seeks patterns and previous experiences which mould our perception, then we have output such as contemplation of the inputs, largely looking for patterns, we have speech, we have movement, we have hormone reactions to the inputs etc. This may be called consciousness by some... I see nothing more than the sum of input, processing and output...so for me I see no need of an external source of anything. So I have no idea why people assume it. But as I made clear, this is almost impossible to prove as we have no means of testing it all ......yet.
