Kelly wrote:
>
> On May 23, 12:54 pm, Brent Meeker <meeke....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
>> Either of these ideas is definite
>> enough that they could actually be implemented (in contrast to many
>> philosophical ideas about consciousness).
>>
>
> Once you had implemented the ideas, how would you then know whether
> consciousness experience had actually been produced, as opposed to the
> mere appearance of it?
>
> If you don't have a way of definitively detecting the hoped for result
> of consciousness, then how exactly does being "implementable" really
> help? You run your test...and then what?
It's no different than any theory (including yours). You draw some
conclusions about what should happen if it's correct, you try it and you
see if your predictions work out. If I program/build my robot a certain
way will it seem as conscious as a dog or a chimpanzee or a human? Can
I adjust my design to match any of those? Can I change my brain in a
certain way and change my experienced consciousness in a predictable
way. If so, I place some credence in my theory of consciousness. If
not - it's back to the drawing board. Many things are not observed
directly. No theory is certain; it may be true but we can never be
certain it's true.
Brent
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sat May 23 2009 - 23:19:12 PDT