<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<p>James,<br>
</p>
<p>After thinking about this for a year or more, and hearing your's
and Stathis' comments (in his post he asked: "Yes, but do you
agree that despite the silicon-based comparator neurone you
describe being physically different, the rest of the brain will
function exactly the same?")</p>
<p>I think I have a better understanding of your logic in these
complaints.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>The way the substitution would feel as the substitution wave
traversed across the brain would be highly dependent on the type
of binding mechanism the brain employed to bind all of this
knowledge together so we can be aware of the physical quality of
it it all at once. When we look at a strawberry we are aware of a
3D model of the strawberry. We can split the image up into 3D
voxel elements, and we are aware of the quality of each voxel
element on the surface of the strawberry and the leaves, again all
at the same time. So lets say that there is one neuron that
represents each voxel element, firing on all it's downstream
synapses with glutamate when representing the surface of the
strawberry. It would take much more than a single neuron to bind
all this together, including the semantic information that it all
represents a red strawberry.... but let's just imagine that the
binding system is one single awareness neuron for simplicity
purposes. This large neuron needs to have an upstream synapse
touching each of these actual knowledge voxel neurons, each firing
- some with glutamate and some with glycene. Otherwise, it
couldn't be aware of the entire thing all at once. Steven Lehar
postulates that this knowledge is neurons firing in standing wave
patterns, so maybe this large single neuron aware of the physical
quality of all our knowledge representation neurons is
coordinating the firing pattern of all of these neurons so they
fire in a standing wave or something.</p>
<p>Anyway, the point being is that if you could do the entire
binding process with one neuron, it would function the same as
James is demanding when you replace it. When you replace the one
large binding neuron, only then could you replace all the upstream
neurons and translators producing glutamate. But of course,
everyone would know this was only functionally the same - both
interpreting the very different physical representations as if
they were red. But the binding system probably isn't a single
neuron, so there may be some type of possible wave, during the
substitution, for which the system would not behave the same -
saying that that glutamate is nothing like a positive voltage.<br>
</p>
<br>
<p>Brent<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I tried to explain that it wouldn't be identical behavior, until
the entire substitution<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/22/2016 3:21 PM, James Carroll
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALbjWndQATXNjG6XbMhDAuPH4wQ2jY8GoCmDVEZWj3yWsVJ3Jw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 2:31 PM,
Brent Allsop <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:brent.allsop@gmail.com" target="_blank">brent.allsop@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">Oh
great.<span> </span>Thanks, James, for this
reply.<span> </span>I realized after I sent my post,
that
I left a few important things out, and you are clearly
pointing these omissions
out.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">The
difference
is that computer functional logic is all implemented
above and abstracted away
from the quality of the physical hardware level.<span>
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>You are begging the question.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">All
representations have a translation or transduction
system that physically translates between all the
different physical
representations, so they can all be thought of or
function as 1s and 0s.<span> </span>But we are
different.<span> </span>The physical quality of our
representations
is all important, and included in all of the
comparison and intelligent
processing systems.<span> </span>With us, we can be
aware of and reflect on what they are like, but with a
computer, all that is abstracted
away by all the hardware translators.<span>
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>You are begging the question. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">So,
true Chalmers admitted that the fading / dancing
qualia is a possibility,
and this is exactly what this theory predicts will
happen.<span> </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>If you believe in fading and dancing qualia, then your
qualia is epiphenomenal. YOUR qualia may be epiphenomenal,
mine isn't. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">If
the comparison system can detect a
phenomenal quality of positive voltages and zero
voltages, then there will be
dancing qualia, as you make the substitution.<span>
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>But the behavior will be unchanged.... When YOUR qualia
change, does your behavior remain unaltered? <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">If
there is no qualia at all, it will be fading qualia.<span>
</span>Except that qualitatively, you will be able
to tell with the first comparator substitution.<span>
The prediction is that you will never be able to
construct any of the comparitors to say glutamate is
the same as +5 volts. </span><span></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Sure, to preserve the behavior the translation at the
boundary between the mechanical element and the natural
one is necessary. Again, so what? That doesn't mean that
there is no qualia in a system that is mechanical, with
the proper translation at the boundaries. <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Remember that you can push the boundary where the
"translation" takes place completely outside the brain,
and translate between the brain and the muscles of your
mouth, eyes, skin (for touch) etc. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">So
you will not be able to “flip the switch”
between the first comparator substitution, and not see
a difference between
them.<span> </span>True, you will be able to replace
everything, and eventually it will start functioning
entirely identically.<span> </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>It will function identically during the in-between
steps too... so long as there is a translation layer
between each of the mechanical neuron and the natural
ones.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">But,
as the wave of conversion progresses
partially along, this theory is predicting there will
clearly be dancing / fading qualia, until everything
is replaced and the quality of the representations
becomes entirely irrelevant - abstracted away from the
quality of the physical layer - everyone admitting
that there is clearly a big difference due to the
dancing / fading qualia as you progressed to the
eventually completely identical behavior.<span
class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>But if the behavior is unchanged (as it must be), then
the person will have their qualia fade, all the while they
claim that their qualia is NOT fading... that's exactly
what the contradiction of the thought experiment is. And
that is why Chalmers and I think that his thought
experiment means that qualia MUST be functional. <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>James<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Web:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://james.jlcarroll.net"
target="_blank">http://james.jlcarroll.net</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>