>
> >From another list:"And the human brain is the pinnacle
> of both models, an extended mind."
>
> Hmm... if the self-sampling assumption (SSA) is correct we should find our
> intelligence, consciousness, awareness, to be roughly half way between that
> of a virus and that of the most intelligent beings in the universe.
How so? I would have thought that the SSA would predict we should have
the minimum complexity capable of sustaing consciousness.
>
> > And the images that combine to form a human mind:
> > somatosensory, proto-self, consciousness -- these
> > are all incorporated into larger systems of
> > information. Thus, your mind, your thoughts, are
> > also part of a larger system that exists as
> > zillions of minds, a meta-mind. And perhaps there
> > are zillions of meta-minds which are part of a
> > meta-meta-mind. No "layer" lower in the hierarchy
> > is aware of any higher layer since it only exists
> > at the simpler informational level of, say, one
> > human brain.
> >
> > The ultimate meta-mind is having the experience
> > of the entire universe. Everything that happens
> > in the universe is a part of its mind. But just
> > as you don't determine what your next thought will
> > be, neither does this ultimate mind. The movements
> > of the universe follow mindless physical
> > limitations (including some indeterminance
> > perhaps).
> >
> > All the images of the universe (including minds)
> > are just shadows of discrete reality projected onto
> > a continuous background. A mind is information, and
> > information is always about something else. It's
> > always determined. That's what it is; it can be no
> > more. A human mind is information about the
> > relationships of particles in the brain.
> >
> > Eric
>
>
This reminds me of some of the orginal Gaia-like super-organism ideas that
floated around in the mid 80s. However, I don't really think this is
true. An entity that could know everything (omniscience) would be
powerless to act (ie omniscience >< omnipotence). With our MUH or
plenitude picture, and entity that could observe the entire plenitude
would in fact know nothing, as the plenitude has zero information
content. Such a being would have maximum capacity to act (ie be
omnipotent). Maximum knowledge comes by obscuring the plenitude, so
that the universe's history is precisely specified, down to the last
bit. Such a being might have the capacity to know everything about
that particular universe, but would be powerless to change
anything. Our (human existence) occupies a range in between those two
extremes - the plenitude is obscured enough so sufficient information
is available to support our intelligent complexity, but not so much as
to severely limit out freedom of will.
Demigods may exist (cf the meta-mind mentioned above), however true
gods that are either ominiscient or omnipotent are surely
mathematically meaningless.
Cheers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Russell Standish Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit,
University of NSW Phone 9385 6967
Sydney 2052 Fax 9385 6965
Australia R.Standish.domain.name.hidden
Room 2075, Red Centre
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Mon Oct 11 1999 - 18:39:43 PDT