Search found 372 matches

by TrlstanC
Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:17 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Philosophy and science of gender and sex
Replies: 118
Views: 8309

Re: Philosophy and science of gender and sex

A lot of trans women's day to day experience is of trying to pack in enough femininity in any way they can to cross the threshold into social acceptability. A similar situation is true for many non-binary people (and even cis people, particularly men, who are gender non-conforming). I think this is...
by TrlstanC
Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:29 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

What does it mean to be "fundamental to the universe"? We are talking about something that is inherently self-referential. Not fully explainable in terms of other laws of physics, particles, etc. As ucim said, the question of whether consciousness exists or not is something that everyone ...
by TrlstanC
Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:38 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

No, the Chinese Room argument more or less assumes that (and then concludes that therefore passing a linguistic Turing test isn't sufficient to demonstrate consciousness). Despite the fact that it seems to argue against the Turing test, I don't think that's actually the point of the Chinese Room ar...
by TrlstanC
Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:54 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I'd say that being awake and being conscious are correlated, but they're definitely not the same thing. Otherwise I don't think we'd need words for dreaming or sleepwalking. And as far as being useful, I'd say that consciousness is, in a sense, the only thing that matters. To see why, imagine a pill...
by TrlstanC
Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:00 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

It doesn't say anything at all about systems constructed on a different basis That's right, and I think Searle would absolutely agree that there are some computers that can run a program to fluently speak Chinese, which are conscious. It's just that those computers are humans, and they're built in ...
by TrlstanC
Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:37 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

This is the assumption I'm objecting to—I think the only physical thing that allows for conscious experience is the fact that physics allows for complex circuits to exist Well, that's the exact opposite conclusion from Searle's argument. So to defend that point of view I think you're going to have ...
by TrlstanC
Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:36 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I would say that if you're adding stuff that results in the Chinese Room being able to carry on a fluent, human-like conversation in Chinese, then you didn't solely add syntax I'd agree, given the construction of the chinese room, if a person could "operate" it smoothly just from memory t...
by TrlstanC
Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:51 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

And that's why I think Searle's thought experiment only proves something trivial (syntax is not semantics) and not the substantial thing he wanted to prove (computers can't think) I believe he assumes that syntax is not semantics, or at least he uses the two words as if they mean different things. ...
by TrlstanC
Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:05 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I would say that even if the chinese room were functionally equivalent to a person, that it wouldn't be the same as a human, for two reasons: ⋅ Defining what counts as the room is somewhat arbitrary. If we can't even figure out what parts of a human are necessary for consciousness, then I ...
by TrlstanC
Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:59 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I don't think I'd be confident making any conclusions about what consciousness is or isn't given how little we know about it, from an objectively epistemic perspective we know essentially nothing. No. Consciousness is the result of a physical process that happens in the brain. Important difference. ...
by TrlstanC
Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:02 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

[url]But that doesn't mean that we have reflexive access to the information about every interaction with every photon we're undergoing.[/url] Ahhh, ok! I get what you're saying, you're right I was getting hung up on the name. And I think that's a really interesting point because it raises some good ...
by TrlstanC
Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:07 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I think you are overlooking the distinction I keep emphasizing between phenomenal and access consciousness. I've just never seen a good argument for why it should be called "access consciousness" as opposed to "access to consciousness". I think everyone would agree that phenomen...
by TrlstanC
Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:41 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I wouldn't say that (phenomenal) consciousness is the subjective experience of a physical force; it's not like, as in your example, magnetism is consciousness, or anything like that. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't? The fact that we have no idea what causes conscious experiences makes it hard to say ei...
by TrlstanC
Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:27 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

Re: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

Saying that everything has a first-person experience as a subject isn't really any more interesting or substantive a statement than saying everything has a third-person behavior as an object: okay, but what is its behavior, what is its experience, in short what is its function? That's what really m...
by TrlstanC
Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:37 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment
Replies: 64
Views: 10624

The Assumptions of Searle’s Chinese Room Thought Experiment

I recently stumbled on this Talk at Google where Searle discusses the Chinese Room at length. It's a great review of the argument, and a number of raise good, if typical, questions at the end. Here's the wikipedia page for Searle's Chinese room thought experiment . The experiment is part of the foll...
by TrlstanC
Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:06 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

I'm going to try and take this back to some more concrete footing. First, just stating a couple assumptions. I'm not really going to try and defend or justify them here, if anyone has a serious objection to any of them, than that's probably an entirely different discussion: 1. Animals (at least us, ...
by TrlstanC
Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:50 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Voting Third Party.
Replies: 103
Views: 21647

Re: Voting Third Party.

Duverger's law Duverger's Law is slightly more specific in that it looks at the way votes are cast and counted. And it's certainly true that some systems of voting are more likely to create, or reinforce two party systems. But there's a couple reasons why focusing too much on mechanics can be a mis...
by TrlstanC
Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:25 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Voting Third Party.
Replies: 103
Views: 21647

Re: Voting Third Party.

Yep. Non-FPTP exists in other countries, though. How did they get it? I believe it's mostly a matter of how the system was initially set up. Most systems develop a certain degree of inertia, so as they gain size, it's hard to do the kind of sweeping changes you can initially. Most third (or fourth,...
by TrlstanC
Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:05 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: For those of us in non-swing states
Replies: 23
Views: 7773

Re: For those of us in non-swing states

I posted an argument here ( Is it worth going to vote ) that argues that the same reasoning we can use to vote for a third party candidate in non-swing states, can be used to vote for either of the major party candidates as well. Your individual vote isn't going to change the winner of the election,...
by TrlstanC
Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:17 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

Honestly, if it gets the same outcomes, I don't care about the process. I'll call it intelligent if it can act more or less like a human. I'd agree, if something acts more or less human, than we should definitely call it inteligent. And since nothing we've ever made does act more or less human, tha...
by TrlstanC
Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:50 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

After some reflection, I think that this might be a problem of language, more than a problem of research. Particularly in regards to AI which I think our best bet at learning more about human intelligence and consciousness. When we say "Artificial Intelligence" I think most people take it ...
by TrlstanC
Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:56 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Is knowledge justified true belief?
Replies: 136
Views: 48209

Re: Is knowledge justified true belief?

Bringing this thread back because I was recently discussing this topic, and there were a couple points that I think are worth clarifying: 1. The only significant change I proposed to the old JTB definition was to replace "justified" with the definition of justified. Apparently though there...
by TrlstanC
Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:59 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Is it worth going to vote?
Replies: 92
Views: 17772

Re: Is it worth going to vote?

That's information you're obscuring with noise if you make people vote. I WANT presidents to realize when nobody is really that enthused about them, and they lack a convincing mandate. I don't want to make people vote, and if people really don't care either way, then I don't think they should vote ...
by TrlstanC
Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:06 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Is it worth going to vote?
Replies: 92
Views: 17772

Re: Is it worth going to vote?

I don't see voter turnout as an end in itself. If someone does not care who gets elected, and would prefer to not vote...excellent. Forcing such a person to vote merely increases the signal to noise ratio. Hell, if nobody else opted to vote at all, that makes my vote more valuable. So, it's actuall...
by TrlstanC
Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:37 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: Is it worth going to vote?
Replies: 92
Views: 17772

Is it worth going to vote?

A few years ago Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt (the authors of Freakonomics ) published an article that made the argument that it wasn't worth voting, and then questioned why people do it anyways. The argument pretty much boils down to "the chances of your vote changing the outcome of an elec...
by TrlstanC
Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:02 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

And here's another new article that features the otherside of learning about the brain - getting one and cutting it up (and maybe shooting lasers at it). Inside Paul Allen's Quest To Reverse Engineer The Brain While it's great to see the amount of interest and funding these kinds of projects are get...
by TrlstanC
Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:23 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

Here's some new results out of a brain modeling project: Blue Brain Project Accurately Predicts Connections between Neurons

This seems like fairly positive news, since this is still early in the project's development, and they're already getting interesting results.
by TrlstanC
Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:26 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

At some point, we'd hook this shit up to the internet. Not just that--imagine giving a machine 'eyes' so it could see. At somepoint soon, hooking up to the internet will be giving a machine eyes. With the IPv6 protocol virtually every sensor and device on the planet can get it's own IP address. A m...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:11 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

A lot of innovation is random. Are we sure that innovation is random? Or would it be more accurate to say that we don't have sufficient access to the process of innovation that we can't describe the source(s) of innovation. And this is a great example of why I always keep this rule in mind. Could i...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:07 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

What I'm saying (perhaps crudely; I think I got carried away with my atom example) is that simulations of reality can only tell us as much as they 'know'. They're only as good as they are accurate. The less accurate they are, the less information they can give us. I think that's only if we focus on...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 7:25 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

So... why not just perform the experiments on our brains? Besides the ethical reasons of experimenting on living brains, two good points that Furber made in his article about the SpiNNaker are that besides learning how the human brain works, his (and other similiar projects) can also: 1. help us le...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:33 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

I'm sorry, but #2 sounds like bizarro-wacky-town. If I want to understand a heart, I don't try to build an artificial heart, then take it apart to figure out how real hearts work. I grab a real heart and study that . Why the hell would we create artificial intelligence, then analyze it to understan...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:08 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

TrlstanC, I'm trying to understand what the hell you're saying but I'm genuinely clueless. I see AI as currently taking two directions: 1. as a tool - this technology is generally built to compliment human abilities, and takes advantage of the strengths of digital computing, crunching lots of numbe...
by TrlstanC
Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:38 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

When looking at how we got to our current situation through evolution, this observation about the amount of information we have to deal with (or that we have available to us, or that we are completely awash in), can hopefully give us a new perspective on some ideas about our behavior or how our cons...
by TrlstanC
Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:36 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

And perhaps I am mistaken, but we process as much information as we need. Think parsimony. This could easily be taken to be saying that all of our decisions are perfect, given all available (and historically available) information. Or that, there's no way we could've been more evolutionary successf...
by TrlstanC
Sun Sep 16, 2012 2:14 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

There's certainly the discussion to be had about why we evolved the kind of consciousness we did, or why we (and other animals) evolved to be conscious at all. I don't think this rule (that the brain receives many more bits of information than it can process intelligently, and that we can only consc...
by TrlstanC
Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:23 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

Sure, but you're not honestly claiming we have HD-quality memories of *everything*, are you? Oh no, certainly not. In fact the visual data we do remember is probably mostly relationships and patterns, and I'd guess that very little of it is actual visual 'data'. But I'd estimate that the visual inf...
by TrlstanC
Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:46 am UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

Why not? We do process huge amounts of information, even if a lot of that processing is saying "This doesn't matter; throw it out." I know that's a form of processing, but it's certainly not making use of, especially if the throwing out happens way before we get a chance to "think&qu...
by TrlstanC
Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:36 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

What most people understand by rational is something along the lines of "optimal given the information available". If we did not justify something consciously it does not imply we did not act rationally. I think most people would say rational is "optimal given the information availab...
by TrlstanC
Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:06 pm UTC
Forum: Serious Business
Topic: The first rule of consciousness?
Replies: 92
Views: 21417

Re: The first rule of consciousness?

I'm not even talking about heart beat, breathing, etc. Although, calling those the "rational" choice seems a bit weird. I mean things like, choosing which route to drive to work, actually driving the car, obeying traffic laws. Even things like conversation, there is research supporting the...

Go to advanced search