Skip to main content

View Diary: Let's Teach the Controversy of Evolution vs Intelligent Design **Updated with Poll question** (365 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  not yet (0+ / 0-)

    Once we build neural networks that approximate brains in animals the answer will be very different.

    +++ The law is a weapon used to bludgeon us peasants into submission. It is not to be applied to the monied elite.

    by cybersaur on Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:11:12 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Only if consciousness (0+ / 0-)

      is a magically 'emergent property' of the wiring. I don't believe in magic, myself. That's probably because I know far too many magicians...

      •  That doesn't follow (0+ / 0-)

        If you don't believe consciousness is a magically 'emergent property' of the wiring between your own ears, there's no reason to make that assumption with a man-made neural net.
        That's like asserting computers can't "remember" things because they're made out of silicon and copper...

        +++ The law is a weapon used to bludgeon us peasants into submission. It is not to be applied to the monied elite.

        by cybersaur on Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:41:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Of course it follows. (0+ / 0-)

          You claim that a complex enough 'neural net' built on the model of, say, a rat brain, would be as conscious as a rat. Or am I misunderstanding your contention?

          Hence, per my understanding of what you've said, consciousness is an emergent property of the 'neural net' and its complexity. Presuming of course we are to believe that rats have consciousness, and the computer speaks English (with a rat's level of consciousness). Is that not so?

          An 'emergent property' is a property/quality of something that emerges suddenly from the underlying complexity without being any sort of inherent property of any component or combination of components from which it emerges.

          IOW, consciousness would not be considered an inherent property of the wires or the electrons running through them, or of the gates that allow its logic functions and/or memory to operate. To where if you gather enough of them in one place, it suddenly wakes up and says, "Hi, there. I'm conscious and self-aware, and your programs are intolerably stupid."

          You are instead saying that the WAY they are interconnected will at some point (X number of connections and cross-connections) magically produce the consciousness that would wake up and say, "Hi, there. I'm conscious and self-aware, and your programs are intolerably stupid."

          I'm not buying it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site