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

[William Flynn Wallace]

I have a hunch they might be on the right track and thus I may not be the
only conscious being in the universe
​ after all​
, but neither they nor I will ever be able to prove it.

​ John K Clark​

Here's the thing:  I want to get you to agree that study of alertness, or
whatever you want to call it, is or can be scientific.  It is clearly a
variable within and between people, it seems to account for a lot of what
we see coming or no coming out of a person (coma, for ex.), and thus it
needs a name and I don't care what that is.

It all comes down to definitions, or examples if you want, and whether you
or I are anyone is conscious is dependent on what examples or definitions
we choose, and thus we can clearly say that someone is or isn't conscious
depending on those examples or definitions.

If I poke you while asleep and while awake I will get very similar behavior
to what others will show, and thus this is a test, or proof, of whatever
you choose to name the variable in question.  If this is not a test of
consciousness according to the examples you would like to use, then I'd
like to know what you would use.  If you think that no one will ever prove
that others are conscious then poking will not suffice as an example in
your opinion.

Every abstract variable, as I am sure I don't have to tell you, is always
and forever in an 'as if' context.  It is 'as if' they have a big ego, or
high intelligence, or low sociability, or poor use of language.  So as with
consciousness:  it is 'as if' they are conscious if they respond in certain
ways in certain conditions.  Thus consciousness is not a fact of life;  it
is a theoretical construct explaining certain facts.  It thus can never
'be' a fact.

bill w

On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 12:15 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 9:34 AM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> You poke someone who is asleep and get no behavior. You poke them when
>> awake and they might poke you back.  Clear link between behavior and
>> consciousness/awareness/ alertness/pick your term.  You don't need
>> assumptions
>
>
>
> You don't need assumptions
> ​ ​
> to know that people in the awake state behave differently than people in
> the sleep state, but so what, we're talking about consciousness
> ​ ​
> not behavior. The assumption is so deeply ingrained we seldom even think
> about it,
> ​ ​
> but it's there. Most people believe a sleeping person or a rock or a tree
> or a human cadaver is not conscious because
> ​ ​
> they
> ​ ​
> implicitly or explicitly
> ​ ​
> assume there is a link between intelligent behavior and consciousness.
> Perhaps they're assumption is correct, I have a hunch they might be on the
> right track and thus I may not be the only conscious being in the universe
> ​ after all​
> , but neither they nor I will ever be able to prove it.
>
> ​ John K Clark​
>
>
>
>  ​
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170402/d1cce1ac/attachment.html>