Comments on: Where Does Human Consciousness Come From? http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/ Personal Development for Polymaths Wed, 16 May 2012 19:19:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: scandy http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-305182 scandy Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:55:51 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-305182 The notion that bodily functions are due to a vitalistic principle existing in all living creatures has roots going back at least to ancient Egypt. While vitalist ideas have been commonplace in traditional medicine, attempts to construct workable scientific models date from the 17th century, when it was argued that matter existed in two radically different forms, observable by their behavior with regard to heat. These two forms of matter were termed organic and inorganic. Inorganic matter could be melted, but could also be restored to its former condition by removing the heat. Organic compounds "cooked" when heated, transforming into new forms that could not be restored to the original. It was argued that the essential difference between the two forms of matter was the "vital force", present only in organic material. Vitalism is an ancient doctine found throughout many ancient cultures, a pure vitalistic doctrine however can be traced back to Galen of the second century, a physician who became a surgeon for gladiators at Pergamum. When studying the anatomy of the human body he did not believe that the living organisms could be explained by mindless interplay of atoms, he believed there was a vital force which powered the human body. Like Erasistratus he believed a vital force was absorbed through the lungs from the air. Vitalism, as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is 1. a doctrine that the functions of a living organism are due to a vital principle distinct from biochemical reactions 2. a doctrine that the processes of life are not explicable by the laws of physics and chemistry alone and that life is in some part self-determining Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark," "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the "soul". Pasteur demonstrated empirically in 1858 that fermentation only occurs when living cells are present and, further, that cells only carry out fermentation in the absence of oxygen, leading him to describe fermentation as ‘life without air’. Finding no support for claims such as those advanced by Berzelius, Liebig, Traube and other chemists that fermentation resulted from chemical agents or catalysts within cells, Pasteur concluded that fermentation was a ‘vital action’. In addition to their apparent success in showing that fermentation only occurs in living cells, vitalists like Pasteur also appealed to their demonstration that living organisms always originate from living organisms and that there is no spontaneous generation. The idea of spontaneous generation was inspired in part by the observation of small organisms forming in putrefying matter. The controversy is rooted in the conflict between John Needham (1713–81) and Lazarro Spallanzani. Needham heated closed vessels of meat-broth, discovering that when cooled they still yielded micro-organisms. Spallanzani insisted on longer heating, and in his vessels no micro-organisms developed. In this context, Pasteur showed that heated organic matter remained sterile unless contaminated but that, if contaminated, the previously heated material sustained life. This supported the conclusion that new life-forms only emerge from existing ones and provided additional evidence for the vitalist claim that living organisms are inherently different from non-living entities. Alfred Russel Wallace believed qualitative novelties could arise through the process of evolution, in particular the phenomena of life and mind, like the vitalists Wallace attributed these novelties to a supernatural agency. Later in his life, Wallace was advocate of spiritualism and believed in a non-material origin for the higher mental faculties of humans, he believed that evolution suggested that the universe had a purpose, and that certain aspects of living organisms are not be explainable in terms of purely materialistic processes, in a 1909 magazine article entitled The World of Life, which he later expanded into a book of the same name. ‘’ Neither Darwinism nor any other theory in science or philosophy can give more than a secondary explanation of phenomena. Some deeper power or cause always has to be postulated. I have here claimed that the known facts, when fully examined and reasoned out, are adequate to explain the [[p. 434]] method of Organic Evolution; yet the underlying fundamental causes are, and will probably ever remain, not only unknown, but even inconceivable by us. The mysterious power we term life, which alone renders possible the production from a few of the chemical elements of such diverse fabrics as bone and skin, horn and hair, muscle and nerve, and brain cells; which from identical soil, water, and air, manufactures all the infinitely varied products of the vegetable kingdom,.. will surely never be explained--as many suppose they will be, in terms of mere matter and motion. Every attempt to explain these phenomena--even Darwin's highly complex and difficult theory of Pangenesis--utterly breaks down; so that now, even the extreme monists, such as Haeckel, are driven to the supposition that every ultimate cell is a conscious, intelligent individual, that knows where to go and what to do, goes there and does it! These unavailing efforts to explain the inexplicable, whether in the details of any one living thing, or in the origin of life itself, seem to me to lead us to the irresistible conclusion that beyond and above all terrestrial agencies there is some great source of energy and guidance, which in unknown ways pervades every form of organised life, and of which we ourselves are the ultimate and fore-ordained outcome’’ (Alfred Russel Wallace) Joseph C. Keating, Jr., PhD, discusses vitalism's past and present roles in chiropractic and calls vitalism "a form of bio-theology." He further explains that: Vitalism is that rejected tradition in biology which proposes that life is sustained and explained by an unmeasurable, intelligent force or energy. The supposed effects of vitalism are the manifestations of life itself, which in turn are the basis for inferring the concept in the first place. This circular reasoning offers pseudo-explanation, and may deceive us into believing we have explained some aspect of biology when in fact we have only labeled our ignorance. 'Explaining an unknown (life) with an unknowable (Innate),' suggests philosopher Joseph Donahue, D.C., 'is absurd'. The notion that bodily functions are due to a vitalistic principle existing in all living creatures has roots going back at least to ancient Egypt. While vitalist ideas have been commonplace in traditional medicine, attempts to construct workable scientific models date from the 17th century, when it was argued that matter existed in two radically different forms, observable by their behavior with regard to heat. These two forms of matter were termed organic and inorganic. Inorganic matter could be melted, but could also be restored to its former condition by removing the heat. Organic compounds “cooked” when heated, transforming into new forms that could not be restored to the original. It was argued that the essential difference between the two forms of matter was the “vital force”, present only in organic material.

Vitalism is an ancient doctine found throughout many ancient cultures, a pure vitalistic doctrine however can be traced back to Galen of the second century, a physician who became a surgeon for gladiators at Pergamum. When studying the anatomy of the human body he did not believe that the living organisms could be explained by mindless interplay of atoms, he believed there was a vital force which powered the human body. Like Erasistratus he believed a vital force was absorbed through the lungs from the air.

Vitalism, as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is
1. a doctrine that the functions of a living organism are due to a vital principle distinct from biochemical reactions
2. a doctrine that the processes of life are not explicable by the laws of physics and chemistry alone and that life is in some part self-determining
Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the “vital spark,” “energy” or “élan vital”, which some equate with the “soul”.

Pasteur demonstrated empirically in 1858 that fermentation only occurs when living cells are present and, further, that cells only carry out fermentation in the absence of oxygen, leading him to describe fermentation as ‘life without air’. Finding no support for claims such as those advanced by Berzelius, Liebig, Traube and other chemists that fermentation resulted from chemical agents or catalysts within cells, Pasteur concluded that fermentation was a ‘vital action’.

In addition to their apparent success in showing that fermentation only occurs in living cells, vitalists like Pasteur also appealed to their demonstration that living organisms always originate from living organisms and that there is no spontaneous generation. The idea of spontaneous generation was inspired in part by the observation of small organisms forming in putrefying matter. The controversy is rooted in the conflict between John Needham (1713–81) and Lazarro Spallanzani. Needham heated closed vessels of meat-broth, discovering that when cooled they still yielded micro-organisms. Spallanzani insisted on longer heating, and in his vessels no micro-organisms developed. In this context, Pasteur showed that heated organic matter remained sterile unless contaminated but that, if contaminated, the previously heated material sustained life. This supported the conclusion that new life-forms only emerge from existing ones and provided additional evidence for the vitalist claim that living organisms are inherently different from non-living entities.

Alfred Russel Wallace believed qualitative novelties could arise through the process of evolution, in particular the phenomena of life and mind, like the vitalists Wallace attributed these novelties to a supernatural agency. Later in his life, Wallace was advocate of spiritualism and believed in a non-material origin for the higher mental faculties of humans, he believed that evolution suggested that the universe had a purpose, and that certain aspects of living organisms are not be explainable in terms of purely materialistic processes, in a 1909 magazine article entitled The World of Life, which he later expanded into a book of the same name.

‘’ Neither Darwinism nor any other theory in science or philosophy can give more than a secondary explanation of phenomena. Some deeper power or cause always has to be postulated. I have here claimed that the known facts, when fully examined and reasoned out, are adequate to explain the [[p. 434]] method of Organic Evolution; yet the underlying fundamental causes are, and will probably ever remain, not only unknown, but even inconceivable by us. The mysterious power we term life, which alone renders possible the production from a few of the chemical elements of such diverse fabrics as bone and skin, horn and hair, muscle and nerve, and brain cells; which from identical soil, water, and air, manufactures all the infinitely varied products of the vegetable kingdom,.. will surely never be explained–as many suppose they will be, in terms of mere matter and motion.

Every attempt to explain these phenomena–even Darwin’s highly complex and difficult theory of Pangenesis–utterly breaks down; so that now, even the extreme monists, such as Haeckel, are driven to the supposition that every ultimate cell is a conscious, intelligent individual, that knows where to go and what to do, goes there and does it!
These unavailing efforts to explain the inexplicable, whether in the details of any one living thing, or in the origin of life itself, seem to me to lead us to the irresistible conclusion that beyond and above all terrestrial agencies there is some great source of energy and guidance, which in unknown ways pervades every form of organised life, and of which we ourselves are the ultimate and fore-ordained outcome’’ (Alfred Russel Wallace)

Joseph C. Keating, Jr., PhD, discusses vitalism’s past and present roles in chiropractic and calls vitalism “a form of bio-theology.” He further explains that:
Vitalism is that rejected tradition in biology which proposes that life is sustained and explained by an unmeasurable, intelligent force or energy. The supposed effects of vitalism are the manifestations of life itself, which in turn are the basis for inferring the concept in the first place. This circular reasoning offers pseudo-explanation, and may deceive us into believing we have explained some aspect of biology when in fact we have only labeled our ignorance.

‘Explaining an unknown (life) with an unknowable (Innate),’ suggests philosopher Joseph Donahue, D.C., ‘is absurd’.

]]> By: Kai http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-303811 Kai Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:01:00 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-303811 Yes Dr A... I like what you say. My formula for human being is : consciousness appearing as human being (or human doing). Consciousness is all there is. Recognize that "consciousness" is just a word... and as Krishnamurti said, "The word is not the thing" Yes Dr A… I like what you say. My formula for human being is : consciousness appearing as human being (or human doing).

Consciousness is all there is.

Recognize that “consciousness” is just a word… and as Krishnamurti said, “The word is not the thing”

]]> By: dr.A.syam http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-302716 dr.A.syam Mon, 08 Aug 2011 04:46:48 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-302716 The whole issue to be resolved what makes us to feel what we are, what we want and attending to that task. It is a fact that even a baby cries and makes it explicit that he wants something, i.e. milk and based on that expression of cry , the parents feed baby. What I mean to say is that even the new born baby knows what it wants, and we also know that it also wants the comfort and warmth of mother.It means the new born baby is also conscious and has the consciousness before it can actually verbalise it. So, based on that , it appears consciousness must be there before the actual birth of physical baby takes place. so. may be, the consciousness is separate from physical body and brain. just like, say, air, water,etc. It may be a separate and individual component of universe. Like this;-RNA+DNA+OXGEN+WATER+PROTEINS+MUSCLES+BRAIN+ CONSCIOUSNESS= Human being. So, accordingly, it appears that consciousness is a separate element of nature,and ,it runs the brain. Like super ego or PARAMATMA. brain with thought process is ATMAN and the the free will which exercises the choice and which decides the point of attention is CONSCIOUSNESS, the PARAMATMA. SO, there may be a separte and free universal element called CONSCIOUSNESS like air and water. Comments please. The whole issue to be resolved what makes us to feel what we are, what we want and attending to that task. It is a fact that even a baby cries and makes it explicit that he wants something, i.e. milk and based on that expression of cry , the parents feed baby. What I mean to say is that even the new born baby knows what it wants, and we also know that it also wants the comfort and warmth of mother.It means the new born baby is also conscious and has the consciousness before it can actually verbalise it.
So, based on that , it appears consciousness must be there before the actual birth of physical baby takes place. so. may be, the consciousness is separate from physical body and brain. just like, say, air, water,etc. It may be a separate and individual component of universe.

Like this;-RNA+DNA+OXGEN+WATER+PROTEINS+MUSCLES+BRAIN+ CONSCIOUSNESS= Human being. So, accordingly, it appears that consciousness is a separate element of nature,and ,it runs the brain. Like super ego or PARAMATMA. brain with thought process is ATMAN and the the free will which exercises the choice and which decides the point of attention is CONSCIOUSNESS, the PARAMATMA.
SO, there may be a separte and free universal element called CONSCIOUSNESS like air and water. Comments please.

]]> By: D J Wray http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-238551 D J Wray Sat, 11 Jun 2011 03:57:57 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-238551 In my opinion consciousness comes from physical *and* non-physical (dualism) sources. Consciousness is a shared resource and your thoughts switch between the two modes transparently, meaning that you don't notice it happening. D J Wray In my opinion consciousness comes from physical *and* non-physical (dualism) sources. Consciousness is a shared resource and your thoughts switch between the two modes transparently, meaning that you don’t notice it happening.

D J Wray

]]> By: Daniel http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-104430 Daniel Wed, 24 Nov 2010 10:22:28 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-104430 I think that consciousness may arrive from nature also, i mean, that may be it is fundamental to nature, but we just can experience true ourselves of course. So as an animal, even an insect like a bee it is shown to have it, and other species have their own kind of language, feelings, emotions, so if those are sings of consciousness well may be other living organisms or entities like a star or a planets, even galaxies, or why not, the whole universe ( I think Nature's imagination is so much greater than man's that she's never going to let us relax. - Richard Feynman ), may have some different "degrees" or "levels" of consciousness. Where is consciousness its located? in wish part of the body? is it really at some point inner our structure, our bodies? I think that the brain its like a platform or emulator for the consciousness, may be the the more capabilities you have in your brain the more consciousness manifests. But nevertheless i think consciousness remain outside the body, but at the same time receiving and experimenting all the qualities that all our bodies provide to it. We suffer, we feel joy, some people cant watch, others cant hear, different channels of information take place. Different scenarios for consciousness to take within all kinds of life forms. It would be my guess. We individualize consciousness but the whole universe may be something like its playground. I mean if consciousness dont have mass, or place in space, therefore consciousness could have the power to transcend even these laws of nature. In these case it would be easy to understand it like consciousness taking over all the times since the big bang, all the galaxies, all the possible ways of life, till this universe of ours run out of time, space and matter to play with it. Our universe is creative, nature (metaphorically speaking) its like an Sculptor, the sculpture its its own body, the universe, trough the times, and consciousness has been there since the beginning i think, and even more, i think its the only thing that its going to remain if the universe ends up in a freeze up or whatever. Again there may be many other universes with plenty of space and matter for consciousness to manifest. And so, endless something and nothing at the same time. :O Saludos amigos! I think that consciousness may arrive from nature also, i mean, that may be it is fundamental to nature, but we just can experience true ourselves of course. So as an animal, even an insect like a bee it is shown to have it, and other species have their own kind of language, feelings, emotions, so if those are sings of consciousness well may be other living organisms or entities like a star or a planets, even galaxies, or why not, the whole universe ( I think Nature’s imagination is so much greater than man’s that she’s never going to let us relax. – Richard Feynman ), may have some different “degrees” or “levels” of consciousness.
Where is consciousness its located? in wish part of the body? is it really at some point inner our structure, our bodies?

I think that the brain its like a platform or emulator for the consciousness, may be the the more capabilities you have in your brain the more consciousness manifests.
But nevertheless i think consciousness remain outside the body, but at the same time receiving and experimenting all the qualities that all our bodies provide to it. We suffer, we feel joy, some people cant watch, others cant hear, different channels of information take place. Different scenarios for consciousness to take within all kinds of life forms. It would be my guess.
We individualize consciousness but the whole universe may be something like its playground. I mean if consciousness dont have mass, or place in space, therefore consciousness could have the power to transcend even these laws of nature. In these case it would be easy to understand it like consciousness taking over all the times since the big bang, all the galaxies, all the possible ways of life, till this universe of ours run out of time, space and matter to play with it. Our universe is creative, nature (metaphorically speaking) its like an Sculptor, the sculpture its its own body, the universe, trough the times, and consciousness has been there since the beginning i think, and even more, i think its the only thing that its going to remain if the universe ends up in a freeze up or whatever. Again there may be many other universes with plenty of space and matter for consciousness to manifest. And so, endless something and nothing at the same time. :O

Saludos amigos!

]]> By: Warrior.for.the.Force http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-55619 Warrior.for.the.Force Sun, 20 Jun 2010 06:08:18 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-55619 Does a human have consciousness? Your current consciousness is made up of absorbed data and experiences. Does a Computer have consciousness? A computer Absorbs data through a webcam, collects data through the microphone ect. Does it think or not think? The microphone will adjust the level of volume, based apon the level of input. Is that via choice? Did it decide to do that? Is it conscious because it changed its settings? A lot of people would say that a person is different from a computer, because they can think. Well, defining thinking? I could say that the computer is thinking because its taking my voice and adjusting the volume accordingly. Its no different from a human thinking about having chicken tonight instead of pork. Or thinking about going to go pay there bill, or do whatever. Its ultimately just a more complexed version of a computer. A program response. Functioning under the specific programs, one has accumulated from there upbringing and society. If you ask someone a question and they give you a response, does that make them conscious? No. its still a function. Based on a programmed thought process. When the computer adjusts its volume automatically. Who defined what level of sound would be ‘medium’. it was programmed with a opinion of someone’s idea, of what they thought ‘medium’ was. We are all programmed with different opinions based on our individual life experiences. Ultimately our decision is made by someone else. Parent values/political values ect. Which were programmed into us, though out the years. No different from a computer being programmed. Humans are not conscious. They Automate through life. When your on the computer can you see outside of it? The wall behind it? can you feel the chair your sitting on? the tempreture of the room, the breeze as it touches your skin? Are you aware of your body right now? No, your completely ambsorbed in the reading these words. Your not aware of any of those things, unless its brought to your attention. Consciousness is a function of the soul. A human must reflect deeply, have self reflection and ask the big questions ’Who Am I? Is there more to life then what I can see with my eyes. And Touch with my hands?’, ' in order to create a soul. Conciousness is becoming aware that you were automated. When you realise you were automated, you’ve just woken up and become aware. Does a human have consciousness?
Your current consciousness is made up of absorbed data and experiences.

Does a Computer have consciousness?
A computer Absorbs data through a webcam, collects data through the microphone ect.
Does it think or not think?
The microphone will adjust the level of volume, based apon the level of input. Is that via choice? Did it decide to do that? Is it conscious because it changed its settings? A lot of people would say that a person is different from a computer, because they can think.

Well, defining thinking? I could say that the computer is thinking because its taking my voice and adjusting the volume accordingly. Its no different from a human thinking about having chicken tonight instead of pork. Or thinking about going to go pay there bill, or do whatever. Its ultimately just a more complexed version of a computer. A program response. Functioning under the specific programs, one has accumulated from there upbringing and society.

If you ask someone a question and they give you a response, does that make them conscious? No. its still a function. Based on a programmed thought process.
When the computer adjusts its volume automatically. Who defined what level of sound would be ‘medium’. it was programmed with a opinion of someone’s idea, of what they thought ‘medium’ was.

We are all programmed with different opinions based on our individual life experiences. Ultimately our decision is made by someone else. Parent values/political values ect. Which were programmed into us, though out the years. No different from a computer being programmed.

Humans are not conscious. They Automate through life.
When your on the computer can you see outside of it? The wall behind it? can you feel the chair your sitting on? the tempreture of the room, the breeze as it touches your skin? Are you aware of your body right now?
No, your completely ambsorbed in the reading these words. Your not aware of any of those things, unless its brought to your attention.

Consciousness is a function of the soul.
A human must reflect deeply, have self reflection and ask the big questions ’Who Am I? Is there more to life then what I can see with my eyes. And Touch with my hands?’, ‘ in order to create a soul.

Conciousness is becoming aware that you were automated.

When you realise you were automated, you’ve just woken up and become aware.

]]> By: kai http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-39812 kai Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:00:11 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-39812 Yes... the first option is correct. We (you) are consciousness ... you are not an individual with consciousness. The body/mind is a machine but you as consciousness are aware of sensations, thoughts etc. Thoughts happen but there is no thinker... only undifferentiated consciousness. What usually happens is that we identify with an object (what we see in the mirror, or a thought - as the thinker-) instead of the subject. When you look in the mirror you are seeing exactly what you are not! When you look in the mirror two things become apparent: one, ther is the object being seen, and there is the seer... they are completely different. For further info check out Douglas Harding (Headlessness) or Peter Dziuban cheers, kai Yes… the first option is correct. We (you) are consciousness … you are not an individual with consciousness. The body/mind is a machine but you as consciousness are aware of sensations, thoughts etc. Thoughts happen but there is no thinker… only undifferentiated consciousness.

What usually happens is that we identify with an object (what we see in the mirror, or a thought – as the thinker-) instead of the subject. When you look in the mirror you are seeing exactly what you are not! When you look in the mirror two things become apparent: one, ther is the object being seen, and there is the seer… they are completely different.

For further info check out Douglas Harding (Headlessness) or Peter Dziuban

cheers, kai

]]> By: Christopia » Blog Archive » New Blogs Update 2 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-37768 Christopia » Blog Archive » New Blogs Update 2 Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:31:06 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-37768 [...] This is a good blog for somebody interested in science or science fiction. The author writes long and detailed posts in an easy to read essay style. His posts focus on the more philosophical aspects of scientific development such as artificial intelligence. [...] [...] This is a good blog for somebody interested in science or science fiction. The author writes long and detailed posts in an easy to read essay style. His posts focus on the more philosophical aspects of scientific development such as artificial intelligence. [...]

]]> By: Andrew http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-37459 Andrew Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:03:25 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-37459 The chinese room problem is designed to show that software can never have an understanding in the way that we do. It simply isn't possible; however lifelike it may appear, because it will always just be following instructions. It is a rejection of the "Brain as a computing machine" idea. Even if you replicate an entire brain, at the end of the day there is still software simulating neurons and converting that into 1s and 0s. I'm not entirely convinced by it myself, as I am not entirely convinced that our understanding is much more than a massive set of rules governing, if x then y, albeit with a much more sophisticated mechanism. It is a powerful argument nonetheless and one that I don't think has an answer right now. The chinese room problem is designed to show that software can never have an understanding in the way that we do. It simply isn’t possible; however lifelike it may appear, because it will always just be following instructions. It is a rejection of the “Brain as a computing machine” idea. Even if you replicate an entire brain, at the end of the day there is still software simulating neurons and converting that into 1s and 0s.

I’m not entirely convinced by it myself, as I am not entirely convinced that our understanding is much more than a massive set of rules governing, if x then y, albeit with a much more sophisticated mechanism. It is a powerful argument nonetheless and one that I don’t think has an answer right now.

]]> By: Hunter Nuttall http://hunternuttall.com/blog/2010/01/human-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-37456 Hunter Nuttall Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:56:27 +0000 http://hunternuttall.com/blog/?p=1818#comment-37456 @ Andrew, very good point. I'm not sure that a non-physical consciousness couldn't affect physical processes without a third thing, but the idea does present a complication. I've come across the Chinese room problem recently, and it's very interesting. So what does it mean to say that an AI program understands Chinese, if a human manually executing the source code could produce the same results without understanding it? @ Andrew, very good point. I’m not sure that a non-physical consciousness couldn’t affect physical processes without a third thing, but the idea does present a complication.

I’ve come across the Chinese room problem recently, and it’s very interesting. So what does it mean to say that an AI program understands Chinese, if a human manually executing the source code could produce the same results without understanding it?

]]>