[ExI] Why stop at glutamate?

[Brent Allsop]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 9:51 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 11:30 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 7:45 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 9:20 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 3:21 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 12:05 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other parts of the brain decode the meaning of the signals they
>>>>>>> receive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They decode it to WHAT?  Decoding from one code, to another code,
>>>>>> none of which is like anything
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You are now theorizing that there is nothing it is like to be the
>>>>> process that decodes a signal and reaches some state of having determined
>>>>> which from a broad array of possibilities, that signal represents. That is
>>>>> what qualia are: discriminations within a high dimensionality space.
>>>>>
>>>>> nor are they grounded is not yet grounding anything.  It is still just
>>>>>> a code with no grounded referent so you can't truly decode them in any
>>>>>> meaningful way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> What does it mean to ground something? Explain how you see grounding
>>>>> achieved (in detail)?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is all about what is required (experimentally) to get someone to
>>>> experience stand alone, no grounding dictionary required, "old guys
>>>> redness".  (the requirement for grounding as in: "oh THAT is what old guys
>>>> redness is like.")
>>>>
>>>
>>> You need to be the conscious of old guy's brain to ever know that.
>>>
>>
>> I've had this identical conversations with multiple other people like
>> John Clark.  Our response is canonized in the RQT camp statement
>> <https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Theories-of-Consciousness/6-Representational-Qualia>.
>> In summary, It's the difference between elemental qualities and
>> composite qualities.  Of course, if you consider redness to be like the
>> entire monalisa, it is going to be much more difficult to communicate what
>> all that is like.  And you have to transmit all the pixels to accomplish
>> that.  All that is required, is elemental codes, that are grounded in
>> elemental properties.  And send that grounded code, for each pixel of the
>> monalisa, to that person.
>> P.S.  the person receiving the coded message, could decode the codes,
>> representing the mona lisa, with redness and greenness inverted, if they
>> wanted.  I guess you would consider that to be the same painting?
>>
>
> No.
>
> There is no objective image (i.e. imagining) of the Mona Lisa. There just
> some arrangement of atoms in the Louvre. Each person creates the image anew
> in their head when they look it it, but there's no way of sharing or
> comparing the experiences between any two individuals.
>
> If you think otherwise could you explain how two people with different
> brains could come to know how the other perceives?
>

There is the weak form of communicating qualities which you can do if your
terms are physically grounded (i.e. redness is glutamate) in a reliably
reproducible way.  so if you objectively detect that objective description
of redness for one brain, is an objective description of greenness in
another brain.
That would enable you to ground a sufficiently defined statement like: "My
redness(glutamate) is like your greenness(glycine), both of which we call
red."
Here is a description of the strongest form of effing the ineffable taken
from my "3 Types of Effing the Ineffable
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JKwACeT3b1bta1M78wZ3H2vWkjGxwZ46OHSySYRWATs/edit>"
document.

Half of our visual knowledge is in our left hemisphere, the other half, in
the right.  The Corpus Callosum
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_callosum> computationally binds these
into one unified conscious awareness of everything around us.  If we
had a neural
ponytail <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf9SWvs4beE>, which could
computationally bind like the corpus callosum, this would enable us to
experience all of the experiences, not just half, when we hug someone.  If
the first two inverted systems were computationally bound with a neural
ponytail, they would both directly (infallibly) experience the other's
inverted knowledge of the world.  You’d be aware of what is behind you, as
seen through your partner’s eyes, that knowledge being red green inverted
from your knowledge of what is in front of you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230411/9c7f39c0/attachment-0001.htm>