What is the definition of “I”? -- “I” is the software which runs on neural-network-HW

[neuroclusterbrain]

"Then we can replace the second original natural neuron by artificial neuron, then we can replace the third neuron, the fourth neuron, and so on – even when all neurons in the brain will be replaced by artificial neurons – the “I” will remain unchanged"
demonstrably doubtful. When neuron dies and if they are replaced the original neuron connection to the network is gone. The new one would build new connection. What you are describing , replacing the neuron with an artificial one with the same connection, is a nice gedanken experiment, but approximately as worth as the teleportation one : you start with a premise which match what you think will happen. Change the premise and the conclusion differs.
The "I" is defined by the combination at the same point in time of the hardware (neuron network) and the state of those neuron network. There is no such a thing as an I separate from the full network - there is no software. Remove 1 neuron and it is a different I , either in an imperceptible manner or in a big one. But still a different I.

While Aepervius was writing this message Aepervius has lost tenths or hundreds of neurons inside his own brain – the neurons naturally die in your brain every minute, which means that according to the logic of Aepervius , the “I” of Aepervius has become different after he wrote his message. That is correct – the “I” of Aepervius is changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – “I” is still the software. Yes, indeed this software is slightly changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – it is still the software.

=======================
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090526223555AAwfI3j
How many neurons does the average human lose in a day?
Also, if it depends on the age-group, is there a chart online that I could look at to see the rate of losing nuerons plotted on the Y coordinate and the human's age plotted on the X coordinate?

Best Answer:
It is said that about 80,000-100,000 neurons die each day, to be replaced by new, migrating neurons made by the hippocampus, which is in the limbic parts of the brain, according to new researches.
Of course, with Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, and Dementia, the loss of neurons becomes significant, even reaching up to 400,000-800,000 per day.
During the fetal period up to birth, about one-third to two-third of all neurons made during the embryonic period dies as it migrates and differentiates - by the age of twenty, a person will have lost 1/3 of what is left after the massive neuronal deaths during birth.
Source(s):
Neuroscientist

You lose thousands of neurons a day (I think estimated is 50-80,000), and lose substantial amount of cortex in age-related dementias like Alzheimer's and FTD. However, some prunining which occurs during early infancy has a positive side as it is essential for maturation.
(the comment about neurogenesis in the hippocampus is partially true, however the migration is minuscule, as those neurons remain in the hippocampus) You can also get new neurons in the olfactory bulb, while much is not known why it happens.
=======================

Religious adepts are strongly convinced that during a lifetime the immortal soul/spirit collects “spiritual experience” and “develops/enhances spirituality” – at the first glance such claim looks correct, as for example, let’s take a kindergartener and an adult – in this case an adult is “much more experienced and much more spiritually developed” than a kindergartener. However this theory of “spiritual development during a lifetime” has one fundamental fault which religious adepts fail to notice, the fundamental bug of this theory is the following – when a man reaches old-age then all his mental-spiritual abilities begin to deteriorate, majority of pensioners get dementia which becomes stronger and stronger with every year – these old men lose their memories, forget their own names, etc. Only in rare exceptional cases old-man retains fully functioning vivid clear mind while the majority of old men get dementia and prayers to God and/or strict observance of religious regulations does not save them from old-age dementia.
The real world fact of old-age men getting dementia disproves the beliefs of religious adepts who claim that during lifetime human soul/spirit collects “spiritual experience” and “develops/enhances spirituality”. Even if we will make an assumption that human soul/spirit does collect “spiritual experience” then this period happens only from childhood to adulthood, however later human soul/spirit starts to lose all his “accumulated spiritual experience” – you can easily verify that by visiting any retirement home (a.k.a. old people's home) which houses many old-age people.

=======================
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24171622
Meeting the religious needs of residents with dementia.
Higgins P.
Abstract
This article considers practical strategies to help nurses working in care homes meet the religious needs of people with dementia, including attending services in homes or churches, supporting them in private prayer and at the end of life. It also considers the characteristics of person-centred care for such residents and how the Mental Capacity Act 2005 may be called on to support religious needs as dementia advances. To achieve good practice in all these aspects, staff in care homes should work in partnership with local faith communities and ensure they are aware of residents' life histories and preferences, including their faith practices. The focus of the article is on meeting the needs of Christian residents. For residents from other faith groups living in care homes not affiliated to their faith, the same general approach to meeting religious needs could be adopted as a starting point.
Nurs Older People. 2013 Nov;25(9):25-9. doi: 10.7748/nop2013.11.25.9.25.e501.
=======================

=======================
https://books.google.com/books?id=s...al+illness#v=onepage&q=Mental illness&f=false
Mental illness has also deeply touched my own life. Several years ago, my mother died after a long battle with Alzheimer’s disease. It was heartbreaking to see her gradually lose her memories of her loved ones, to gaze into her eyes and realize that she did not know who I was. I could see the glimmer of humanity slowly being extinguished. She had spent a lifetime struggling to raise a family, and instead of enjoying her golden years, she was robbed of all the memories she held dear.
Michio Kaku. The Future of the Mind. The Scientific Quest to Understand, Enhance, and Empower the Mind-Doubleday. 2014
=======================

And this leads to a simple conclusion – if you believe that you will take your “accumulated spiritual experience” into post-mortal world then you should kill yourself while you are in the peak of “accumulated spiritual experience” – if you will not do that then senility will wipe out your “accumulated spiritual experience” just like the piece of ice melts under the hot sun, and into post-mortal world you will take only pity leftovers of your “accumulated spiritual experience”. One of the main reasons why people want to have children is the expectation that your children will take care of you in your elderly years. Actually, there is no guarantee that your children will take care of you in your elderly years, as for example your children may die or become invalids earlier than you, however that is not the main point. Let’s take “the best case scenario” and let’s assume that your children will take care of you in your elderly years – in that case your children will sustain you being alive longer which will result in you reaching deeper stages of dementia and losing even more of your “accumulated spiritual experience” when compared to scenario in which you had died earlier still having larger amount of “accumulated spiritual experience”. Just think for a moment – what kind of “spiritual experience” the old-man will take into post-mortal world when he is completely lost in time and space, when he does not remember his own name, etc.
Religious adepts are convinced that after the death of their physical bodies their soul/spirit will travel into the paradise/hell or will reincarnate into some other living creature/being. Let’s analyze both scenarios.
According to religious dogmas all these old-age doddering dementia-ill adepts who go to Church every weekend – all these dementia-ill adepts will get into the paradise after the death of their physical bodies. Which means that if you will get into the paradise too then you will find yourself surrounded by myriads of these dementia-ill souls who are completely lost in time and space, who do not remember their own names, etc – according to religious dogmas all these dementia-ill souls will be gathered into the paradise because they had observed religious orders during their earthly life – which raises a simple question: do you really want spend your eternity completely surrounded by these myriads of dementia-ill souls inhabiting the paradise, is it really your most desired goal?
Now let’s analyze another scenario – the reincarnation of your soul/spirit into some other living creature/being. You have had very hard time trying to accumulate “spiritual experience” during your earthly lifetime, and then in old age you become dementia-ill and lose all your accumulated “spiritual experience” and as a result you reincarnate into the cockroach. In your new cockroach-life you have no idea for what kind of “bad karma” you were punished to become a cockroach, because according to dogmatism of reincarnation the soul/spirit has no remembrance whatsoever from the previous life. So this cockroach has no idea whatsoever what sin/error he needs to repair from previous life, because the cockroach knows nothing about his previous human-incarnation. In the new reincarnation as the cockroach you again try to accumulate “spiritual experience”, then cockroach gets old age, becomes dementia-ill, loses all his accumulated “spiritual experience”, and after the death reincarnates into the amoeba. And the process is repeated again and again the infinite number of times... a really meaningless scenario of existence, isn’t it?

Bellow is the simple thought experiment which disproves the claim of religious adepts that during a lifetime the immortal soul/spirit collects “spiritual experience” and “develops/enhances spirituality”.
Let’s raise a simple technical question: is the soul/spirit a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object? In other words, can the soul/spirit be divided into the composing parts or not?
Here we have two scenarios:
1) If the soul/spirit is divisible object then the soul/spirit is not immortal because it can be destroyed by dividing it into the composing parts.
2) If the soul/spirit is indivisible object then it cannot collect “spiritual experience” because in order to able to save the information about the “collected experience” you need to have the ability to change the states/positions of the composing parts of that object. By definition the indivisible object cannot store information about its previous experience.
In both scenarios the religious dogmas are crushed. If the soul/spirit is able to collect “spiritual experience” then this means that the soul/spirit must be composed of composing parts which means that such soul/spirit is not immortal – it can be destroyed by dividing it into the composing parts. And if the soul is immortal then it must be indivisible which means such soul/spirit cannot collect “spiritual experience” during the lifetime which means that all religious rituals/practices which supposedly collect “good spiritual experience” – all these religious rituals/practices are meaningless.
Two dogmas – 1) the immortality of the soul/spirit and 2) the collection of “spiritual experience” during the lifetime – are two dogmas which contradict each other – if one dogma is true then another dogma is automatically false, they cannot be both true simultaneously.

 

[Aepervius]

While Aepervius was writing this message Aepervius has lost tenths or hundreds of neurons inside his own brain – the neurons naturally die in your brain every minute, which means that according to the logic of Aepervius , the “I” of Aepervius has become different after he wrote his message. That is correct – the “I” of Aepervius is changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – “I” is still the software. Yes, indeed this software is slightly changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – it is still the software.

No. At every single of those moment the illusion of the I is created by the neuron. There is no software. At every of those single moment where neuron got gone or new connection were built it was not a software I but the summation of the network and its neuron status which was the I illusion. There is not a single I but a changing serie of I. Your ship of Theseus allegory does not work. The point is that every single one is not a software thingy but a combo of hardware network and neuron state. So your thesis fail on that point.

eETA: and frankly there is not really an I if I understood the latest research : there is a series of massively parallel network working on different stuff and interconnecting, and the emerging stuff is what we see as the I.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Does this guy actually think that there are wires and hard drives inside people's heads? I'm confused.

 

[Loss Leader]

While Aepervius was writing this message Aepervius has lost tenths or hundreds of neurons inside his own brain – the neurons naturally die in your brain every minute, which means that according to the logic of Aepervius , the “I” of Aepervius has become different after he wrote his message. That is correct – the “I” of Aepervius is changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – “I” is still the software. Yes, indeed this software is slightly changing every minute, however the underlying nature of “I” remains the same – it is still the software.

You are reasoning by analogy. When telephones were new, people compared brains to switchboards. You're just substituting the gee-whiz invention of the moment.

What evidence is there that the underlying "I" stays the same when neurons die? The general sense of self continues, but there's no objective indication it's the same self. You, yourself, said consciousness is an illusion.

None of this makes any sense.

 

[Donn]

Does this guy actually think that there are wires and hard drives inside people's heads? I'm confused.

Sounds like he thinks it runs assembly on the bare metal.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

For any naturally occurring organism, consciousness can be inferred from behavior. This is true because brains require energy. Larger brains require more energy than smaller brains. So, brains will allows tend towards the smallest and lowest energy configuration. Consciousness is much less complex than any other brain structure that could produce similar behavior. So, given a behavior of sufficient complexity, that could either be the result of consciousness or non-conscious brain organization, we can infer that the conscious configuration is vastly more likely.
So, the second part of this problem is what kind of behavior would be indicative of this level of complexity. Many organisms exhibit instinctive behavior which we can assume is a type of fixed pattern behavior. Behaviors that are fixed (or hard-wired) would not suggest consciousness. Random behaviors would also not suggest consciousness. You can't solve problems very well with either fixed or random behavior so conscious behavior is easier to detect when you see problem solving. However, it can be seen in certain behaviors that don't involve problem solving.
When you look specifically at humans, the level of complexity increases quite a bit. It becomes not just possible but necessary to infer conscious for certain patterns since a non-conscious brain organization would not fit within the size of the skull.

Let’s raise a simple question: did barehl provide us the definition of “consciousness” which would meet the scientific criteria? In order to meet the scientific criteria, you must provide the list of criteria (the list of features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
Actually barehl did not provide list of criteria which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.

Barehl, please provide us the exact list of exact criteria (the list of exact features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
And when barehl will write down such list of criteria then please apply this list to some concrete cases in order to demonstrate that it really works for real world cases.
Let’s put this list of criteria to the test.
As for example, using your list of criteria please determine if the following objects have consciousness or not:
1) computer game character;
2) computer AI chatbot;
2) dream character (a character which you see during the dream and with which you communicate in the dream)
3) a tree,
4) an amoebae,
5) virus,
6) a stone.

And now the second question for the barehl: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
The feature divisibility/indivisibility is the most fundamental feature of the object, because it instantaneously reveals the fundamental flaws in the definition of the object.
So, what is your answer: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?

 

[William Parcher]

Knock knock.
Who's there?
Reversal of the burden of proof.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Does this guy actually think that there are wires and hard drives inside people's heads? I'm confused.

Sounds like he thinks it runs assembly on the bare metal.

There is no software. At every of those single moment where neuron got gone or new connection were built it was not a software I but the summation of the network and its neuron status which was the I illusion. <…> The point is that every single one is not a software thingy but a combo of hardware network and neuron state.

The misunderstanding here is due to the lack of knowledge in the fields of information theory and computer science. The term “software” has a much broader meaning than many people are used to. Usually when people hear the word “software” they associate that word with digital computers which run digital software. However there is a completely separate class of computing machines which is called “analog computers”. Analog computers process information in completely different way than digital computers and also what is important – the software which runs on analog computers has completely different form from digital computers. Instead of digital digits analog computers process information in another form – they process analog signals. As for example, analog computer can process information in the form of pneumatic or hydraulic streams instead of electric signals.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Analog_computer
An analog computer is a form of computer that uses the continuously changeable aspects of physical phenomena such as electrical, mechanical, or hydraulic quantities to model the problem being solved. In contrast, digital computers represent varying quantities symbolically, as their numerical values change. As an analog computer does not use discrete values, but rather continuous values, processes cannot be reliably repeated with exact equivalence, as they can with Turing machines. Analog computers do not suffer from the quantization noise inherent in digital computers, but are limited instead by analog noise.
Analog computers were widely used in scientific and industrial applications where digital computers of the time lacked sufficient performance. Analog computers can have a very wide range of complexity. Slide rules and nomographs are the simplest, while naval gunfire control computers and large hybrid digital/analog computers were among the most complicated. Systems for process control and protective relays used analog computation to perform control and protective functions.
The advent of digital computing and its success made analog computers largely obsolete in 1950s and 1960s, though they remain in use in some specific applications, like the flight computer in aircraft, and for teaching control systems in universities.
<…>
Analog computers often have a complicated framework, but they have, at their core, a set of key components which perform the calculations, which the operator manipulates through the computer's framework.
Key hydraulic components might include pipes, valves and containers.
Key mechanical components might include rotating shafts for carrying data within the computer, miter gear differentials, disc/ball/roller integrators, cams (2-D and 3-D), mechanical resolvers and multipliers, and torque servos.
Key electrical/electronic components might include:
=======================


What is important here to understand is – in order to process information you need to have two things: 1) a hardware (computing machine) which runs 2) software (algorithms which process that information).
Human brain does process information, which means that by definition human brain contains software which runs on the neural-hardware (neurons of the brain). Human brain is the computing machine which process information in both forms (analog and digital) simultaneously.

 

[barehl]

People who use term “consciousness” are unable to provide scientific definition of the term “consciousness”, they are unable to provide the list of criteria (the list of features) which would allow to determine if object X has consciousness or not, and they are unable to provide any proof that they themselves have “consciousness”.

Parts of the brain (and neural networks in general) are good at pattern detection. Pattern detection without consciousness can only be linked to behavior. When you have pattern detection in the context of consciousness, that is comprehension and is not directly linked to behavior.

These patterns are abstractions. Abstractions can be used for goal seeking behaviors. Honey bees, for example, use several abstractions as well as memory and communication. However, the ability to manipulate abstractions to create derivative inferences is intelligence. To the best of my knowledge, there are no organisms that have intelligence without consciousness.

Consciousness in organisms is a continuous monitoring and optimization of personal actions by means of intelligence within the constraints of the environment.

appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence, as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink.

If you can find that in my posts, let me know.

professor Marvin Minsky, one of the founding fathers of artificial intelligence, told me that the mind is more like a “society of minds,” with different submodules, each trying to compete with the others.”.
In Neurocluster Brain Model we use the term “main personality” instead of Gazzaniga’s “interpreter module” and Blakeslee’s “self module”.

Yes, I've already dismissed these concepts.

 

[Donn]

However there is a completely separate class of computing machines which is called “analog computers”..

Can you give an example of this software that runs on an analog computer?

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

To the best of my knowledge, there are no organisms that have intelligence without consciousness.
Consciousness in organisms is a continuous monitoring and optimization of personal actions by means of intelligence within the constraints of the environment.

Let’s summarize the essence of definitions provided by barehl:
1) What is the “intelligence”, how can we detect if object X has intelligence or not? --> Object X has intelligence ONLY IF it has consciousness (== “there are no organisms that have intelligence without consciousness”)
2) What is the “consciousness”, how can do we detect if object X has consciousness or not? --> Object X has consciousness ONLY IF it has intelligence (== “Consciousness… is a continuous monitoring and optimization of personal actions by means of intelligence”).

In other words, according to barehl, intelligence is defined via consciousness, and consciousness is defined via intelligence.
As we can clearly see, this definition is recursive, in other words, it is pointing to itself. --> "To define recursion, we must first define recursion."

Recursive definitions are meaningless by definition.
Recursive definitions do not match the scientific criteria.
Recursive definition is pure pseudoscience.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Can you give an example of this software that runs on an analog computer?

Here is one example:
=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-2_rocket
The V-2 (German: Vergeltungswaffe 2, "Retribution Weapon 2"), technical name Aggregat-4 (A4), was the world's first long-range guided ballistic missile. <…>
Some later V-2s used "guide beams", radio signals transmitted from the ground, to keep the missile on course, but the first models used a simple analog computer that adjusted the azimuth for the rocket
=======================


Here are some more examples:
=======================
http://www.analogmuseum.org/english/impressions/
Impressions of Analog Computers
<….>
Large scale russian special purpose analog computer ZI-S used to solve questions in the field of hydraulics (cf. V. B. Ushakov, "Soviet Trends in Computers for Control of Manufacturing Processes", in "Instruments and Automation", Nov. 1958, p. 1812).
<…>
Analog computers at a NASA simulation facility during the development of the control stick for project Mercury.
<…>
Analog computer used at NASA for lunar landing simulations.
=======================

 

[Donn]

To the best of my knowledge, there are no organisms that have intelligence without consciousness.

Consciousness in organisms is a continuous monitoring and optimization of personal actions by means of intelligence within the constraints of the environment.

Gotta admit, that does sound a little tautological.

 

[Aepervius]

The misunderstanding here is due to the lack of knowledge in the fields of information theory and computer science. The term “software” has a much broader meaning than many people are used to. Usually when people hear the word “software” they associate that word with digital computers which run digital software. However there is a completely separate class of computing machines which is called “analog computers”. Analog computers process information in completely different way than digital computers and also what is important – the software which runs on analog computers has completely different form from digital computers. Instead of digital digits analog computers process information in another form – they process analog signals. As for example, analog computer can process information in the form of pneumatic or hydraulic streams instead of electric signals.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Analog_computer
An analog computer is a form of computer that uses the continuously changeable aspects of physical phenomena such as electrical, mechanical, or hydraulic quantities to model the problem being solved. In contrast, digital computers represent varying quantities symbolically, as their numerical values change. As an analog computer does not use discrete values, but rather continuous values, processes cannot be reliably repeated with exact equivalence, as they can with Turing machines. Analog computers do not suffer from the quantization noise inherent in digital computers, but are limited instead by analog noise.
Analog computers were widely used in scientific and industrial applications where digital computers of the time lacked sufficient performance. Analog computers can have a very wide range of complexity. Slide rules and nomographs are the simplest, while naval gunfire control computers and large hybrid digital/analog computers were among the most complicated. Systems for process control and protective relays used analog computation to perform control and protective functions.
The advent of digital computing and its success made analog computers largely obsolete in 1950s and 1960s, though they remain in use in some specific applications, like the flight computer in aircraft, and for teaching control systems in universities.
<…>
Analog computers often have a complicated framework, but they have, at their core, a set of key components which perform the calculations, which the operator manipulates through the computer's framework.
Key hydraulic components might include pipes, valves and containers.
Key mechanical components might include rotating shafts for carrying data within the computer, miter gear differentials, disc/ball/roller integrators, cams (2-D and 3-D), mechanical resolvers and multipliers, and torque servos.
Key electrical/electronic components might include:
=======================


What is important here to understand is – in order to process information you need to have two things: 1) a hardware (computing machine) which runs 2) software (algorithms which process that information).
Human brain does process information, which means that by definition human brain contains software which runs on the neural-hardware (neurons of the brain). Human brain is the computing machine which process information in both forms (analog and digital) simultaneously.

Analogue computer are not what you think. Analogue computer works by the network they have and the state they have. Just as described by me above. The algorithm which you are speaking of are contained in the *network* and network component and ab initio data for an analogue computer. Way to shoot yourself in the foot.

 

[Donn]

Here is one example..

I'm not seeing the distinction between hardware and software here. I'm probably not seeing it because I'm not technical nor an expert.

You speak of software in the brain, so it sounds like you mean a specific thing. Software, to me, is a sequence of instructions that trigger varied actions in the hardware. Is that how you use the word?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

There's no reason analog computers couldn't run software the way we think of the term. They just fell out of favor before the separation of hardware and software became a thing.

 

[Donn]

Okay, but neuroclusterbrain complained when software was mentioned, it was called "digital" and then this whole analogue discursion happened. I'm trying to see if this is a difference with some meaning.

 

[dudalb]

Does this guy actually think that there are wires and hard drives inside people's heads? I'm confused.

Well, they show a pretty sophisticated computer system inside the brain in "Inside Out",and the OP probably thinks that is a documentary.....

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Okay, but neuroclusterbrain complained when software was mentioned, it was called "digital" and then this whole analogue discursion happened. I'm trying to see if this is a difference with some meaning.

Oh, okay. I admit not not having read much of his posts so far. I get a few sentences into each one and find it hard to progress much further.

It is true that analog computers as they were in their prime are the closest machine analogy to the human brain. Of course, the brain actively rewires itself continuously, so it's not that close, just closer than comparing it to a modern day digital computer, hamfistedly trying to cram its amazingly complicated signalling behaviors into a series of binary jots and tiddles.

 

[BStrong]

If the body of the op's posts are available on their site, isn't this spamming?