[ExI] Quantum consciousness, quantum mysticism, and transhumanist engineering
brent.allsop at gmail.com
Wed Mar 29 22:37:34 UTC 2017
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com>
> Given the above scenario, do you agree that all the neurons will fire in
> the same sequence? If you disagree, what is triggering them to fire
> differently that the scientist has failed to observe? Don't say "redness"
> or "the binding system" - what specific thing was the glutamate molecule
> doing that G3 is not doing, which the scientist missed?
> I keep answering these same question over and over again. Yes, I agree,
given what you describe all the neurons will fire in the same sequence and
all behavior will be the same. But, despite me clearly answering this
question, you always seem to assume that I disagree. And you say: “Don't
say "redness" or "the binding system". But I’m not saying “redness” or the
“binding system” in the case you are describing, where I agree with you,
that everything will fire the same.
The problem is, we each keep talking about something completely
or the “binding system” has nothing to do with the incomplete scenario you
are describing. You seem to think that because I’m trying to talk about
“redness” and the “binding system” that I disagree with you that everything
will fire the same, in your case. I’m not doing this. I’m just saying
that “redness” and the “binding system” (which we know consciousness has)
has nothing to do with the simplistic scenario you are describing.
Perhaps it will make things easier if we just focus on an objective view of
things, and ignore “redness” all together. The system we want to “neuro
substitute” is a glutamate detector. We artificially design a special
detection system that can compare a reference item (i.e. glutamate) with a
second input item being tested. It is a perfect system, in that if you
present real glutamate, it will always fire with a “this is the same as the
reference” signal. Anything, that is not glutamate, will prevent the
system from firing, indicating they are not the same, or that it isn’t
Now, this kind of detection system is what we want to neuro substitute. The
system you describe, always fires the same, so the system you are
neurosubstituting may not be performing the necessary reliable detection of
glutamate. You seem to make the claim, that your system that always fires
the same, will be able to do things like do qualitative comparisons or
detect real glutamate. I agree with you, that if everything behaves the
same, that it will still be able to do qualitative comparison, or detection
of real glutamate. So, I’m describing a bit more detail, about the system
you are talking about, so that it can perform the detection of real
glutamate. But, no matter how I do this, you always insist, that the
system will not detect glutamate, as it will fire the same, indicating it
is glutamate, even when it is not glutamate. After the neuro substitution,
in order for it to function the same, it must still be able to reliably
perform its necessary function of detect real glutamate.
All I’m trying to say is, I agree with you, that if what you describe is
true, it will always function the same. All I’m doing, is enhancing the
description of the system, so that it can reliably detect real glutamate. If
you do this, and if the system can reliably detect real glutamate, both
before and after the substitutuion, you won’t have hard problems, such as
an overly simplistic substitution seeming to prove there is no such thing
as reliably detectable real material glutamate.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat