RE: The dangers of genuine ignorance (was: Volitional Morality and Action Judgement)

From: Pedro Machin (breedingnitch@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun May 30 2004 - 10:34:41 MDT


> >Natural selection ´bothered´ to create a concious being,

When I said, ´bothered´to create a concious being I was replying to an
earlier post that suggested such.

>Yes, natural selection created me, the only being known with certainty to
>be conscious.
>
> >but it also bothered to create many other non-concious intelligent
>beings.
>
>Like what? And how did you figure out they were non conscious

By non-concious I mean without the ability of self-analaysis or recognition.
Maybe its a problem of terminology, is sentient more apporpriate?

> >conciousness is emergent of intelligence
>
>Yes, exactly! So what are we arguing about?
>

My point was that conciousness is not a requisite of intelligence, but
instead intelligence may imply conciousness.

>From: "fudley" <fuddley@fastmail.fm>
>Reply-To: sl4@sl4.org
>To: "SL4" <sl4@sl4.org>
>Subject: RE: The dangers of genuine ignorance (was: Volitional Morality and
>Action Judgement)
>Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 07:26:09 -0700
>
>On Sun, 30 May 2004 "Pedro Machin" <breedingnitch@hotmail.com> said:
>
> >Natural selection ´bothered´ to create a concious being,
>
>Yes, natural selection created me, the only being known with certainty to
>be conscious.
>
> >but it also bothered to create many other non-concious intelligent
>beings.
>
>Like what? And how did you figure out they were non conscious
>
> >If we define intelligence simply as "the ability to solve
> >complex problems" then there is no need for conciousness
> >or sentience.
>
>We are interested in many problems but the only problem, complex or
>otherwise, natural selection is interested in is “figure out a way to get
>as many of your genes into the next generation as possible”. So if you
>can do that without consciousness why am I (and perhaps you too)
>conscious?
>
> >We have Automated Theorem provers right now that can tackle
> >fairly sophisticated theorems […] In short, symbol manipulation,
> >no matter at what level implies intelligence. 'Intuition', or
> >'creativity' can effectively be emulated by such methods
> >without the need of conciousness;
>
>You claim to have detected intelligence in these programs, I can’t say I
>agree but rather than argue the point I’ll ask another question: What
>method did you use to detect non consciousness in these programs?
>
> >conciousness is emergent of intelligence
>
>Yes, exactly! So what are we arguing about?
>
> John K Clark
>
>
>--
>http://www.fastmail.fm - Consolidate POP email and Hotmail in one place

_________________________________________________________________
Best Restaurant Giveaway Ever! Vote for your favorites for a chance to win
$1 million! http://local.msn.com/special/giveaway.asp



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:47 MDT