[ExI] Quantum consciousness, quantum mysticism, and transhumanist engineering

[John Clark]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

​
>> ​>> ​
>> I think it is a brute fact that consciousness is the way data feels when
>> it is being processed.​
>>
>
>
>
> ​> ​
> define 'feel'.
>

​No.​ Definitions are for losers, examples are for winners.


> ​> ​
> If you are conscious you can feel it; you can feel it if you're
> conscious.  Round and round.
>

​
Yes, but that's not just true of the words feeling and conscious, it's true
for any definition. All definitions in the dictionary are made of words,
and those words are also in the dictionary and
​ ​
are also made of words which are also in the dictionary.... and round
​and round
 we go. The only thing that can get us off that infinite loop and the only
reason language is
​ ​
not meaningless is
​ ​
because of
​ ​
examples, a connection between the ASCII sequence "feel" and something
outside of the dictionary in the physical world. For example: When you put
your hand on a red hot stove you "feel" something.


> ​> ​
> Data processing can be verified objectively for man and machine.
>

​
Yes and that means Evolution can verify it too, but Evolution can NOT
verify consciousness and yet I know for a fact Evolution produced
consciousness at least once on this small planet,
​ ​
and I might not be the only conscious being in the world, perhaps many
billions of other people are conscious too. How can that be? The only
explanation I can come up with is consciousness is an unavoidable byproduct
of data processing.

  John K Clark




>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170401/627fb8f4/attachment.html>