[ExI] Wernicke's aphasia and the CRA.

The Avantguardian avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 12 16:29:43 UTC 2009


>From: Alfio Puglisi <alfio.puglisi at gmail.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Sent: Sat, December 12, 2009 6:13:44 AM
>Subject: Re: [ExI] Wernicke's aphasia and the CRA.
>
>
>I interpret the replacement as using a different electronic equivalent for each neuron, so that their specific functions (if any) will be preserved.

Even so, how could you map that function over the domain of inputs and range of outputs? How precisely is "close enough"? Does the function even remain the same over the life of a neuron? For a simple mathematical example of the problem, consider the functions y=x+13 and y=(x^2-169)/(x-13). Over all of the infinite possible values of inputs x they are "functionally equivalent" and give rise to the same output. . . *except* where x=13. When you *know* the functions, the difference is obvious. But if the functions were hidden within a "black box" and all you could do was plug in random values of x and look at the output, would you notice a difference between the two?

>
> Understanding the neurons' inner working is not needed if you can exactly replace their input/output functions (not an easy feat anyway...) Whether consciousness resides inside single neurons is another matter. In that case, inner workings will need to be replicated too.
>
>Searle's arguments remind me of good old-fashioned dualism: there is something in our brain cells that can't be replicated in a mechanical or electronic equivalent. But without knowing what this "something" is, that's just an article of faith.

Forget brains or neurons for the moment. Sodium is a metal that spontaneously burns when it contacts water. Chlorine is a deadly poisonous gas. When you combine the two in a test tube, you get salt. What does the electronic or mechanical equivalent of salt taste like?

 
Stuart LaForge 

"Science has not yet mastered prophecy. We predict too much for the next year and yet far too little for the next ten." - Neil Armstrong


      



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list