hi Evan, in ur paper u said u defer arguing that only living organisms are conscious, but refer to Peter Godfrey-Smith. i followed it up but don't really see the argument either. in particular, see convo w/ @NeuroYogacara linked below. what's ur take?https://twitter.com/hakwanlau/status/1259306016858009602?s=20 …
-
-
[1] I refer to PGS just for the issue about fineness-of-grain for individuating functions, not for the claim that only living organisms are conscious
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @evantthompson @hakwanlau and
[2] I think we need to distinguish between compositional plasticity and multiple realizability: latter demands same function implemented in different mechanisms operating with different physical principles and causal properties; former is just variation of physical composition
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @evantthompson @hakwanlau and
[3] I'm doubtful consciousness admits of functional multiple realization, though I don't doubt it can be achieved in different material compositions, but I think they'd have to operate according to biological functional principles, hence requires living system to be realized
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
𖤐 🔥Bryce 🔥𖤐 Retweeted 𖤐 🔥Bryce 🔥𖤐
I think I agree, and that this unpacks my hunches here:https://twitter.com/NeuroYogacara/status/1259307244283404288?s=20 …
𖤐 🔥Bryce 🔥𖤐 added,
𖤐 🔥Bryce 🔥𖤐 @NeuroYogacaraReplying to @hakwanlauSeveral questions here... 1. Where do we find C: in bio systems 2. Could you build a C system: maybe, but it would be a waste of time, money, and effort, and it would be hard to pull off. 2b. Would the artificial C system be alive: damn! Hard question. And I lean toward yes1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
@NeuroYogacara then now i get your point which i missed yesterday. so basically u r saying if u mimic the bio functions artificially, to the point it can really do the same jobs, u'd end up having a system that is artificially alive. so nothing non-living can do these jobs. yes?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I don't go in for necessity claims, but I think that it's incredibly unlikely that all of the relevant stuff could be in place in a non-living system. In part, that's because we aren't just talking about neuronal signaling. We need to bring in all of the +
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @hakwanlau and
regulatory stuff that's going on from the cellar level, through the direct chemical signaling, to the systemic effects of neurotransmitters, and the cyclical effects of hormonal fluctuations. Once you get all of that stuff built, interacting, and functioning, my strong +
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @hakwanlau and
suspicion is that the thing you have built, when building a conscious system, will be alive in any sense of that term that we want to take up. Does that help?
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
I think
@NeuroYogacara are on the same page on this issue. (Also, for me, it's not a matter of a priori necessity claims but of plausibility/inference to the best explanation.)1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
@NeuroYogacara & I are on the same page, I mean
-
-
That means I didn’t butcher the things I learned from you too badly! I never thought I would be interested in exploring questions about consciousness...you convinced me that there was a lot there that I should explore,
@evantthompson!1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @evantthompson and
Thanks
@evantthompson that means I owe you big time too!0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.