Well at least you’ve accepted being wrong, that’s progress I guess.
Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Does this sort of rhetorical self-congratulatory idiocy work for you in practice?
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Great! So produce the working algorithm which proves me wrong.
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Then why can't you produce the proof/program?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2% ... espondence
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Because you’re just wrongSkepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:53 pmThen why can't you produce the proof/program?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2% ... espondence
-
- Posts: 5259
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Seriously, are people who are mute, not conscious? Am I missing what your comment says? How can that be?Darkneos wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:25 pmSwing and a miss
Wait a minute, are you saying that I missed the ball or that you did? Are you rudely mocking me or are you humbly admitting a mistake?
Or are you saying that Imp made a mistake?
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Actually, I have an argument for the existence of the mind: Consider a change in a substance, X to Y. X and Y do not occur at the same point since otherwise there could be no change and the process is simultaneous. Therefore, X and Y should occur at different points in time. This means that there is a gap between X and Y so X cannot possibly cause Y. Therefore there must be a mind with the ability to experience X and cause Y.Darkneos wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:44 pmAgain you’re really not proving a mind exists just asserting there is one. Like I said we don’t really have evidence for it.bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:36 pmNo, the mind is needed for the experience. Any experience needs an experiencer. As I said, the experience cannot happen in a vacuum.
You definitely need a brain for thoughts but without a mind, there could not be any experience so no thought.
Experience is not a thing with the ability to cause. That is the mind that experiences and causes.
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Nope, literally none of that is true nor does it imply a mind. A logical argument isn’t proof of anything.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:26 pmActually, I have an argument for the existence of the mind: Consider a change in a substance, X to Y. X and Y do not occur at the same point since otherwise there could be no change and the process is simultaneous. Therefore, X and Y should occur at different points in time. This means that there is a gap between X and Y so X cannot possibly cause Y. Therefore there must be a mind with the ability to experience X and cause Y.Darkneos wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:44 pmAgain you’re really not proving a mind exists just asserting there is one. Like I said we don’t really have evidence for it.bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:36 pm
No, the mind is needed for the experience. Any experience needs an experiencer. As I said, the experience cannot happen in a vacuum.
You definitely need a brain for thoughts but without a mind, there could not be any experience so no thought.
Experience is not a thing with the ability to cause. That is the mind that experiences and causes.
This just sounds like argument from ignorance.
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Nope, it is true and implies a mind.Darkneos wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:46 pmNope, literally none of that is true nor does it imply a mind.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:26 pmActually, I have an argument for the existence of the mind: Consider a change in a substance, X to Y. X and Y do not occur at the same point since otherwise there could be no change and the process is simultaneous. Therefore, X and Y should occur at different points in time. This means that there is a gap between X and Y so X cannot possibly cause Y. Therefore there must be a mind with the ability to experience X and cause Y.
Seriously!?
Ahan. That shows your ignorance to understand my argument.
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
A logical argument isn’t proof of anything. Logic just shows conclusions follow from premises but that doesn’t make the premises true and they’ve been wrong before.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:54 pmNope, it is true and implies a mind.Darkneos wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:46 pmNope, literally none of that is true nor does it imply a mind.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:26 pm
Actually, I have an argument for the existence of the mind: Consider a change in a substance, X to Y. X and Y do not occur at the same point since otherwise there could be no change and the process is simultaneous. Therefore, X and Y should occur at different points in time. This means that there is a gap between X and Y so X cannot possibly cause Y. Therefore there must be a mind with the ability to experience X and cause Y.
Seriously!?
Ahan. That shows your ignorance to understand my argument.
Also you’re delusional if you think this proves a mind. Literally none of it follows. X and y can occur at the same time, the process would just be instant but still change.
“Should” is just explaining what you want to be true not what is and then it fails from there. A gap between things doesn’t mean X doesn’t cause Y.
Nevermind that the conclusion doesn’t even follow one bit from this. You just kinda shoehorn mind in there
Last edited by Darkneos on Sat Jul 01, 2023 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
Which part does not follow?Darkneos wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:56 pmA logical argument isn’t proof of anything. Logic just shows conclusions follow from premises but that doesn’t make the premises true and they’ve been wrong before.
Also you’re delusional if you think this proves a mind. Literally none of it follows
Re: Consciousness requires something more than functionality isomorphic to Turing Machine?
All of it.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:59 pmWhich part does not follow?
You just want there to be a mind an it shows in the “logic”