[ExI] Zombie glutamate

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Monday, February 16, 2015, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','stathisp at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>>
> >>> It means you can open a brain prosthesis business with the
>>>> guarantee that if you look after the technical aspects, any consciousness
>>>> that was there will be preserved.
>>>
>>>
>>> >> But if one of your customers said he was conscious before but after
>>> using your prosthesis he no longer was and demanded you honor your
>>> guarantee and give him his money back how do you know if he's telling the
>>> truth? Do you give him his money back?
>>>
>>
>> > No, because you have a proof that if he was conscious before
>>
>
> How can you have a proof of that?
>

You can prove it conditionally, without knowing whether he as conscious
before or not.

> and he continues to behave the same way now then he is still conscious.
>>
>
> He continues to behave intelligently and if he is still conscious (but is
> he?) that would be consistent with the theory that consciousness is the
> inevitable by product of intelligence. I am certain this theory is true,
> and I'm probably correct too, and there is considerable evidence in it's
> favor; but is there proof? No and there never will be.
>

Yes, there is a proof that IF a being is conscious THEN it is necessarily
conscious. It doesn't help you to know if something is conscious, but it
does give you confidence that appropriately implemented brain implants or
mind uploading will preserve what consciousness was there.


> And there are other theories that are also consistent with everything
> known about consciousness, for example the theory that 2 and only 2
> attributes are needed to be conscious, being male and being 6 feet 2 inches
> tall. The theory that conscious is generated by the left big toe and those
> lacking such a toe are not conscious is also consistent with all the
> evidence. You may say these theories are silly and they are, but like all
> consciousness theories they can't be proven wrong. The
> consciousness-intelligence link theory can't be proven wrong either but it
> has something the others do not, it is the exact same rule of thumb that
> every single one of us has used every single day of our lives to determine
> if something is conscious or not. And I can think of no reason to abandon
> this very useful rule of thumb just because computers are starting to
> behave intelligently.
>
>   John K Clark
>


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150216/afc9bb2c/attachment.html>