<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px;">Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp@gmail.com> wrote:</span><br></div><div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 16px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br></span></div><div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 16px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">> But it </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">can be shown that if it is possible to replicate the behaviour of the</span></div><div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;"><div style="font-family:
'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;"><div class="y_msg_container"><font size="3">> brain then it is also possible (in fact, it follows necessarily) to</font><br><font size="3">> replicate the consciousness. </font><br><br><font size="3">If you think </font>consciousness<font size="3"> follows necessarily from brain-like behavior then I suppose you must think some computers are already at least semi-conscious. I was joking the other day about how I would like sometimes to shoot my stand-alone chess computer, as it seems there is a cunning person inside it and he sometimes makes me angry. It certainly *behaves* as if it is conscious of me, of itself, and the game. Do you think it is actually dimly aware of its own existence?</font></div><div class="y_msg_container"><br></div><div class="y_msg_container">If not, at what point in the development conscious-like behavior do we decide suddenly to grant that an AI has real
consciousness? How is it not arbitrary?<br><br>>> If you believe the world itself is intrinsically digital, (and not merely<br><font size="3">>> describable in digital terms), then I think you have good reason to believe</font><br><font size="3">>> in strong AI and uploading. As for me, I see no reason to believe the world</font><br><font size="3">>> is intrinsically digital. With respect to this part of the world that we</font><br><font size="3">>> call the brain, we do not discover computational states within the physics.</font><br><font size="3">>> We assign them to the physics.</font><br><br><font size="3">>And who assigns the meaning to our own physically based brains?</font><br><br></div><div class="y_msg_container">I don't understand your question, but this in an important point that I'm trying to make here. Who assigns the meaning of what? The brain? As a word, I think "brain" has meaning and that we
assign it that meaning. Does that answer your question?</div><div class="y_msg_container"><br>As for my point, syntax and computational states are not actually intrinsic to the physics of the brain. It would seem that people who follow the computational theory of mind are merely assigning computational states to the physics in a manner not unlike how we assign meanings to words.<br><br></div><div class="y_msg_container">Gordon</div> </div> </div> </div></body></html>