From: Lawrence Foard (entropy@farviolet.com)
Date: Sun Nov 30 2003 - 19:44:41 MST
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Mitchell Porter wrote:
>
> >The real value of what Lanier is saying is that he is "poking the bear".
>
> If and when someone finds macroscopic quantum coherence in
> the brain, then there'll be a new interest in the metaphysics of
> mind. Until that day, classical AI and classical mind uploading will
> remain the focus of the superintelligentsia, and all philosophical
> musings will be shrugged off as language games.
The 'quantum mind' just strikes me as inventing a new supernatural to hide
away in, to replace the old one thats no longer believable in our age. Why
can't we be computers? The arguments I've seen so far just don't hold
water.
Even with the mind as a computer however, it is such a complex system that
there is still plenty of room for its internal study. Just having all the
bits laid our infront of us won't tell us everything. The genome is
decoded and its very small relatively but still contains many (mostly?)
mysteries.
-- Laughter-Confusion, Pleasure-Pain, Happyness-Sadness, Excitement-Fear, Love-Hate, etc. The true primary emotions, a modifier makes each into two. This modifier is acceptance/unacceptance. Let go, surrender, accept... Be a counter terrorist perpetrate random senseless acts of kindness
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:43 MDT