[extropy-chat] A few points of interest for future historians

Mon Sep 26 05:36:29 UTC 2005

>Marc, a top level summary of your view of the discussion 
>on SL4 is OK here, as well as rebuttal from other 
>SL4ers.  Please write in such a way that non-specialists 
>will find it comprehensible, by defining the more obscure 
>terms for instance.

Will give a comprehensible summary of each main conjecture below, with links to references.

DEFINITIONS:  7 Universal Knowledge Domains

Summary of my conjectures:

"I am a property dualist, in that I think that at the 
most fundamental level of reality, there's more than 
one valid way to describe that reality.

Materialism is *one* valid way to describe reality 
(that is, I agree that everything can be *described* 
in physical terms). 

But I'm proposing that materialism is not the *only* 
valid way to describe reality. I think one could for 
instance, equally give a full description of all of 
reality in terms of qualia (mental events). 

So materialism gives a complete *description* of 
reality, but not a complete *explanation* of reality. 
Materialism has *descriptive* completeness, but not 
*explanatory* completeness. I think things like 
volition, qualia etc are fundamental properties of the 
universe. So I think new kinds of science are needed 
to *explain* these things in their own terms."

*Reality itself is operating off 7 different 
mathematical systems. 

*Each of these 7 axiom sets are *almost* but not quite 
logically equivalent. So I'm saying there are small 
inconsistencies in reality itself. 

Referenced definition of 'Property Dualism' :

http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~philos/MindDict/propertydualism.html

Referenced recent philosophy paper arguing that if you believe in abstract entities at all, you must believe in qualia:

http://www.eskimo.com/~msharlow/qualia.pdf 

DEFINITIONS:  Incompletenesss in current Bayesian framework.

The current Bayesian framework consists of Bayes plus Kolmogorov Complexity and Solomonoff Induction.

Referenced explanations:

http://www.idsia.ch/~marcus/kolmo.htm

Sumamry of my conjectures:

"Bayes plus Kolmogorov Complexity and Solomonoff Induction assumes that all reality is reducible to fundamental physics.  But if property dualism is correct this can't be the case.  For instance the current Bayesian framework doesn't deal directly with either mathematical reasoning or mental experiences.  This shows there are things missing.  Current Bayesian framework only deals with the physics kind of causality but there are 2 other kinds of causality"

My proposed 3 different kinds of causality:

"The first is physical causality - motion of physical objects through space.
The second is mental causality   - agents making choices which effect agents
The  third is what I call 'Multiverse causality', a sort of highly abtsract 'causality' close to the notion of logical consistency/consilience - that which ensures that knowledge has a certain ordered 'structure' to it ."

Elaboration:

"Of course I agree that higher level concepts like mind are completely dependent on lower level physics.  A 'mental cause' is not something separate from physical causes.   But this does not mean that the higher level kind of causality is *not real* Just because the high level kind of causality (mental causation) is completely *dependent* on lower level physics, doesn't mean that the mental kind of causality is necessarily completely *reducible* to lower level physics.   In dealing with mental concepts, I think one is dealing with a higher level of description which for full explanation requires the positing of new properties not completely reducible to low level physics.   Again though, I'm not suggesting that mental concepts are separate from physical concepts. "

and

"Stephen Hawking proposed the notion of 'Imaginary Time', a kind of time existing 'at right angles' to ordinary physical time.   This, I suspect, is equivalent to my proposed third kind of causality."

Referenced definition of 'Imaginary Time':
http://library.thinkquest.org/27930/time.htm

DEFINTIONS:  Classification scheme for minds in general based on degree of awareness present:

Summary of my conjectures:

"If you start looking at animals and move up the chain in the direction of increasing intelligence , increasing intelligence *is* correlated with increased *awareness* in some sense.  Rocks have no (or almost no) awareness.  Lower animals, a few very complex computer programs and human infants probably have some degree of awareness of the external world but little or no self-awareness.  It's only once you get to the higher animals and humans that you see awareness of the both the world and some degree of self-awareness emerging.  So it seems you can classify minds in general according to their degree of awareness.  

Now what sort of awareness would a transhuman have then?  I note that even humans don't have *full* self-awareness and self-knowledge.  So the first idea that occurs is that transhumans are defined by the capacity for full self-awareness and self-knowledge.  But further thought suggests that this is not sufficient.  Even full-self-awareness and self-knowledge is still the same *kind* of awareness of we humans already have - just better developed.  

What we need is an idea for a qualitatively *new* kind of awareness, something that goes beyond mere 'self-awareness'.

The idea that occurred to me is that the new kind of awareness involves the connection (or relationship) between Mind and Reality. 

Mind------*relationship*--------Reality

So transhuman awareness might be an awareness of this *relationship*  And an awareness of this relationship constitutes an understanding of the *true* nature of mind.  This understanding doesn't have to be perfect.  Just sufficient. 

Now it just so happens that Reality theorists (or people trying to derieve 'Theories of Everything') have in fact been trying to work out the nature of this relationship between Mind and Reality.  So it would seem that to design an FAI we should study Reality Theory to try to get an insight."

and

"I posit that the Self----World representation causes consciousness (qualia) of the external world and the Current Self---Past Self representation causes consciousness (qualia) about the self - or self-awareness.

In fact I also hypothesize a third kind of representation which could co-exist with the other two and is a new kind of consciousness beyond what the human mind is currently capable of. Here's my hypothesized third kind of consciousness:

Mind<-------->Reality

This would be a representation of the general relationship between Mind and Reality. The representation between the laws of physics and the laws of cognition if you like. I hypothesize that this would be a transhuman type of consciousness. 

The three kinds of representation lead to a classification scheme consisting of 4 different levels, whereby we can classify everything in reality according to the degree of self-awareness present (the first level is no awareness). Here's my classification scheme:

Level 1: Fragments

Low-level disorganized qualia. No self-awareness or awareness of the external world. Examples: Rocks. Rights: None

Level 2: Agents

Rudimentary goal-directed systems. Little-no self-awareness but can form models of the external world. Examples: Animals. Some kinds of computer program, human infants. Rights: Right to be free of suffering. 

(Can form representations of the Self-World relationship)

Level 3: Sentients

Entities with self-awareness. Can form models of self and the external world. Cannot understand the *true nature* of mind though - not a full general intelligence. Examples: Human adults. Rights: Full property rights- right to control own mind and body - right to liberty.

(Can form representations of the Current Self-Past Self relationship)

Level 4: Trans-sentients

Entities capable of fully understanding the *true nature* of mind - the relation between Mind and Reality (has awareness of 'The Theory Of Everything' or TOE). Capable of true general intelligence and recursive self-improvement. Examples: FAI - Friendly Artificial Intelligence. Rights: Who knows?

(Can form representations of the general Mind-Reality relationship) "

References:

Qualia caused by mental representations of relationship between self and world

Representational theories of qualia:  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-representational/

Qualia caused by relationships between current memories and past experiences

Relational theory of qualia:

http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v4/psyche-4-10-taylor.html

---

Please vist my website:
http://www.riemannai.org

Science, Sci-Fi and Philosophy

---

THE BRAIN is wider than the sky,  
  For, put them side by side,  
The one the other will include  
  With ease, and you beside. 

-Emily Dickinson

'The brain is wider than the sky'
http://www.bartleby.com/113/1126.html

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Photos: Now with unlimited storage
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050926/ecf1b5a8/attachment.html>