Re: 'Multiverse Theory' - Universe is a Virtual Reality Matrix
From: Torbj?rn Larsson (070-3993938_at_comhem.se)
Date: 08/02/04
- Next message: Nomen Nescio: "Re: Register, GET OUT & VOTE Republican!"
- Previous message: Double-A: "Re: The Cost of Relativity"
- Maybe in reply to: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "Re: 'Multiverse Theory' - Universe is a Virtual Reality Matrix"
- Next in thread: Torbj?rn Larsson: "Re: 'Multiverse Theory' - Universe is a Virtual Reality Matrix"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 1 Aug 2004 19:44:57 -0700
dralexgreen@yahoo.co.uk (Alex Green) wrote in message news:<42c8441.0407290201.3e42aae@posting.google.com>...
> "Jaxtraw" <jaxtraw@nospamnobigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<1091032395.9260.0@nnrp-t71-03.news.uk.clara.net>...
...
> The term 'conscious experience' is preferrable to the term
> 'consciousness'. 'Conscious experience' is all the things during that
> short period of time that you call 'now'. It includes your inner
> speech, perceptual fields, dreams if they are happening, imagination
> etc. The small part of conscious experience that you call *thinking
> about a thing* is a good skill for success in better paid jobs.
...
> > I doubt it. The main activity of most brains on the planet is running basic
> > processes that maintain the organism. The perceptual field is a useful,
> > associative model of the outside world, but it isn't consciousness.
> > Consciousness is that thinking thing.
>
> All the remarks I have made in earlier posts are about 'conscious
> experience'. It is conscious experience that cannot be simulated in an
> information system. If you define 'consciousness' as a symbol stream
> like language then sure, that could be in a computer. I dont like this
> definition of 'consciousness' and would choose another definition such
> as the manifold that contains (or 'is') concious experience. Unlike
> language this cannot be encoded in a bit stream.
Defining things are always good. Defining consciousness in a useful
manner may be as difficult as defining 'life' but at least we make
some headway here.
As far as I know there are no principal difficulties to someday model
perceptual fields in a computer; it may be complex but I'm sure it's
doable. However I agree with Jaxtraw that it isn't enough to
constitute a consciousness, an awareness of what the
organism/mechanism is doing.
- Next message: Nomen Nescio: "Re: Register, GET OUT & VOTE Republican!"
- Previous message: Double-A: "Re: The Cost of Relativity"
- Maybe in reply to: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "Re: 'Multiverse Theory' - Universe is a Virtual Reality Matrix"
- Next in thread: Torbj?rn Larsson: "Re: 'Multiverse Theory' - Universe is a Virtual Reality Matrix"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|