Does Mind Require a Biological Body to be Conscious?

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Re:

Post by TSBU » Sun Jan 22, 2017 6:21 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
TSBU wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Example?
Bobevenson. He is too repetitive to be a human, and if he is organic, I think someone can programm a bobevenson.

Is it possible to have the number 1234566789 wining the lottery? Yes. Example?
Fallacy of false analogy
That was a joke, not an argument... cheesus... the part of bob. Now, tell why the other one is a wrong analogy.
We "talked" about this in the past, before you left. Consciousness is a nice word, like love, but it is just what it can only be, software in a hardware, a programm in our brain.
The question is "Does Mind Require a Biological Body to be Conscious?" you said NO.
Give an example?
Have you even read my post before start answering? There aren't examples here. Like there aren't of my counterquestion. What is your job, whatare your studies? Cause I know a couple of things about computers (and no, this isn't an ad ignorantiam), and I would like to know what can I say or I can't. But, well, you DONT WANT to show or learn anything, you just want to be right, and, in that case... Oj Hobbes! you are right! for you the glory!
Hardware: Now if we get to define "biological", then I guess that's... based on C? Well, no matter how many combinations are there in our brain, it is possible to do the same with metal, or who knows what, not from a mother.
Software: Well, now that's the problem, noone can explain with their own words what is consciousness, that means, obviously, you can't put in paper your own program thinking, because you can't have a box inside itself. But we are talking about the possibility of existence, and then, yes, of course, it is phisicaly possible (like two human beings comletely equal), there is not a defined and well known rule against it. Now, if we get the "consciousness" definition more laxe (not exactly like you), then, it will become true more easily.
In other words you think you are right because you are too stupid to define consciousness, but think you can fool yourself by making a computer print "I am Conscious".
Fucking wasted oldman... Saying insults doesn't make you more intelligent you know? At least if you were trying to be funny... I'm saying that conscious is a not definible problem. Do you even know what that is? Do you know what is a decidible problem? Have you ever heard of a Turing machine?
In what way are you not just a waste of oxygen?
For you, I hope in anything, I'm doing my best to be useless for you :)

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Sun Jan 22, 2017 7:15 pm

TSBU wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
TSBU wrote: Bobevenson. He is too repetitive to be a human, and if he is organic, I think someone can programm a bobevenson.

Is it possible to have the number 1234566789 wining the lottery? Yes. Example?
Fallacy of false analogy
That was a joke, not an argument... cheesus... the part of bob. Now, tell why the other one is a wrong analogy.
We "talked" about this in the past, before you left. Consciousness is a nice word, like love, but it is just what it can only be, software in a hardware, a programm in our brain.
The question is "Does Mind Require a Biological Body to be Conscious?" you said NO.
Give an example?
Have you even read my post before start answering? There aren't examples here. Like there aren't of my counterquestion. What is your job, whatare your studies? Cause I know a couple of things about computers (and no, this isn't an ad ignorantiam), and I would like to know what can I say or I can't. But, well, you DONT WANT to show or learn anything, you just want to be right, and, in that case... Oj Hobbes! you are right! for you the glory!
Hardware: Now if we get to define "biological", then I guess that's... based on C? Well, no matter how many combinations are there in our brain, it is possible to do the same with metal, or who knows what, not from a mother.
Software: Well, now that's the problem, noone can explain with their own words what is consciousness, that means, obviously, you can't put in paper your own program thinking, because you can't have a box inside itself. But we are talking about the possibility of existence, and then, yes, of course, it is phisicaly possible (like two human beings comletely equal), there is not a defined and well known rule against it. Now, if we get the "consciousness" definition more laxe (not exactly like you), then, it will become true more easily.
In other words you think you are right because you are too stupid to define consciousness, but think you can fool yourself by making a computer print "I am Conscious".
Fucking wasted oldman... Saying insults doesn't make you more intelligent you know? At least if you were trying to be funny... I'm saying that conscious is a not definible problem. Do you even know what that is? Do you know what is a decidible problem? Have you ever heard of a Turing machine?
In what way are you not just a waste of oxygen?
For you, I hope in anything, I'm doing my best to be useless for you :)
I'll take that as you not having a fucking clue what you are talking about.

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Re:

Post by TSBU » Sun Jan 22, 2017 7:32 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
TSBU wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: Fallacy of false analogy
That was a joke, not an argument... cheesus... the part of bob. Now, tell why the other one is a wrong analogy.

The question is "Does Mind Require a Biological Body to be Conscious?" you said NO.
Give an example?
Have you even read my post before start answering? There aren't examples here. Like there aren't of my counterquestion. What is your job, whatare your studies? Cause I know a couple of things about computers (and no, this isn't an ad ignorantiam), and I would like to know what can I say or I can't. But, well, you DONT WANT to show or learn anything, you just want to be right, and, in that case... Oj Hobbes! you are right! for you the glory!


In other words you think you are right because you are too stupid to define consciousness, but think you can fool yourself by making a computer print "I am Conscious".
Fucking wasted oldman... Saying insults doesn't make you more intelligent you know? At least if you were trying to be funny... I'm saying that conscious is a not definible problem. Do you even know what that is? Do you know what is a decidible problem? Have you ever heard of a Turing machine?
In what way are you not just a waste of oxygen?
For you, I hope in anything, I'm doing my best to be useless for you :)
I'll take that as you not having a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Not a surprise XD.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest