Define Consiousness

[BillHoyt]

Re: re "don't pretend"

But with pretense, consciousness can lead one on flights of fancy which seem to rather lose touch with the ordinary world and some end up in delusional states. The balancing act between fantasy and reality is another aspect of Synthetic Consciousness(tm) as hinted at by the double helix suggestion.

Really? More about the double helix? A "balancing act?" Really? Just how does the double helix represent a "balancing act?"

This is more patent nonsense, mystery. With complete scientific illiteracy, you try to link DNA to yin and yang; some kind of metaphoric tension between polar opposites. Bullsh and bafflegab.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Mr. E,
What do you mean by a "subconscious mind", if you don't mind?

 

[Mr. E]

Re: Re: re "don't pretend"

Really? More about the double helix? A "balancing act?" Really? Just how does the double helix represent a "balancing act?"

This is more patent nonsense, mystery. With complete scientific illiteracy, you try to link DNA to yin and yang; some kind of metaphoric tension between polar opposites. Bullsh and bafflegab.

Asked and answered. Once more: "Bullsh" is necessary and "bafflegab" is possible.

Have a nice wait.

I'm waiting. You know what I mean.

ME

 

[Mr. E]

Mr. E,
What do you mean by a "subconscious mind", if you don't mind?

Nice, and nicely put!

Would that be something like the psyche of psychology?

ME

 

[Atlas]

Mr. E,
What do you mean by a "subconscious mind", if you don't mind?

Would that be something like the psyche of psychology?

If you mean it is the psyche of psychology, say that. If you don't know, say that. Jeff is asking an honest question of: What do YOU mean by a "subconscious mind".

Why play this stupid game? If you were being honest with us (or yourself) you would apologize for wasting everyone's time and go away, Or you would try to answer his question straight up.

 

[Mr. E]

If you mean it is the psyche of psychology, say that. If you don't know, say that. Jeff is asking an honest question of: What do YOU mean by a "subconscious mind".

Why play this stupid game? If you were being honest with us (or yourself) you would apologize for wasting everyone's time and go away, Or you would try to answer his question straight up.

Wow. Read minds much? Misread posts much? I wasn't going to mention your oddball use of "we" in prior posts, but now I must. "We"?

No offense: Have you looked in a mirror lately, Atlas??

With all due respect: Maybe you could go do a cold reading on a hot flash then see if you have any insight into the topic.

I think it was more enjoyable shooting the breeze with you about God and the like, but then again, irony is irony except maybe when it's just an accident of nature. You're still a good one, but I can't in good conscience say you are the best pal.


ME

edit for minor typo

 

[Atlas]

Wow. Read minds much?

No, But I read English.

Try it. Read from Jeff's last 3 posts.

And my question about the "subconscious mind" was never satifactorily answered.
I'll reword it. What is the "subconscious mind"? Is it Freud's "unconscious" or something else?

Did you ask explicitly? Even so: Is asking such questions a demonstration of critical thinking?

Those are all good terms to play with, but I would like to focus on the "subconscious mind".

Mr. E,
What do you mean by a "subconscious mind", if you don't mind?

Why do you seek to alienate others when with a straightforward answer you can engage them? Why the condescending tone anytime someone, myself included, asks a straight question of you?

When I say "We" I mean, myself and others. Can you provide some definitions? All I hear are chirping crickets.

 

[Anders]

Re: re "don't pretend"

The balancing act between fantasy and reality is another aspect of Synthetic Consciousness(tm) as hinted at by the double helix suggestion.

That is just plain ignorence. The DNA double helix is real, no doubt about that, not a "suggestion". Proven time after time by thousands of researchers. You can't "hint" anything by using the double helix. A very strange passage indeed. Don't you really have any better to come up with, Mr E?

 

[Mr. E]

Why do you seek to alienate others when with a straightforward answer you can engage them?[...]

Looks like an assumption or two on your part there, Atlas. I came to this forum with a straightforward manner and posted something which seemed like it might fit into the thread. I explained reasons for doing so, had some fun and learned something along the way too. As you should know if you knew anything, I'm kinda waiting for DD to catch up a bit.

I've provided a number of definitions for you to chew on. Chew away, or not, as you like! "Whatever turns you on."

What does "Coherent Irony In Action" mean to you, Atlas? Seriously. You perhaps asked, I replied in kind. You seemed to drop it. Can you define Intellectual Integrity except by demonstrating a lack of it?

How about "I", did you truly define the term? There are many 'I' words which are usable self-referentially, here are some roots for you: "Idiot" "Insult" "Illusion" "Irony" .... "Me" .... "You" ... "We" ... Did you ask me for a definition of the term, and not define yours? Sure looks like it but maybe not.

Do take a look in the mirror, or take two... or go suck on an infinite loop until your "conscious" server crashes if that's what it takes. I mean that in the best possible way I can in this context, really. I'm not perfect so if it comes off wrong, be divine and forgive us.

ME

 

[Mr. E]

Re: Re: re "don't pretend"

That is just plain ignorence.

Hi!

Maybe you are looking at some part of it backwards, Anders. I will stipulate the ordinary existence of DNA for this limited purpose. Granted that, how could my statement make sense other than as mere ignor[a]nce on my part? Please keep in mind the prior context of this thread.

ME

 

[Anders]

Re: Re: Re: re "don't pretend"

Hi!

Maybe you are looking at some part of it backwards, Anders. I will stipulate the ordinary existence of DNA for this limited purpose. Granted that, how could my statement make sense other than as mere ignor[a]nce on my part? Please keep in mind the prior context of this thread.

ME

Well, DNA DOES govern all build up of all tissues in the body including the brain, where our consciousness resides.

But I’m not going to take part in a debate about definition philosophies. But I am going to be there, when people makes false assumption about scientific facts, like DNA or the like.

So please people, continue the philosophy debate, a subject I know absolutely nothing about.

 

[Atlas]

Can you define Intellectual Integrity...

The word you are no doubt unfamiliar with is:Integrity
1 : firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : INCORRUPTIBILITY
2 : an unimpaired condition : SOUNDNESS
3 : the quality or state of being complete or undivided : COMPLETENESS
synonym see HONESTY

You challenge others to define their terms and question their use of terms but when the same is asked of you, all we get is a song and dance. You question the question, call it out of place, call the questioner foolish... anything but answer the question in a straight forward manner.

I will answer all your questions as I did early in our conversation. It is you who need to demonstrate that you are willing to engage in the give and take. You challenged my definitions. I responded. You questioned further, I responded. You pressed on, mincing words. It was then I asked you for your definitions so that I could see what the underlying issues really were between us.

But you were not interested in defining the terms you use... Consciousness, Synthetic Consciousness, and others. Your arguments are Unsound, they are filled with undefined terms and your metaphors do not really inform. You have alienated more posters than you've won over. The fault lies somewhere. Pick up that mirror yourself.

Waiting for DD to catch up? Right. Will we see your definitions then?

And since you asked, I will have no trouble forgiving all that has passed between us, but you must come out into the light Mr E. Hiding in the shadows of your mind won't get you where you want to be.

 

[Mr. E]

You challenged my definitions. I responded. You questioned further, I responded. You pressed on, mincing words. It was then I asked you for your definitions so that I could see what the underlying issues really were between us.

Mincing words? As I indicated at the time I didn't understand why "symbol" and "association" both needed to appear in that definition. After a bit you said you could be persuaded but seemed to ignore my follow-up and instead in effect accuse me of not having presented any definitions even tho' I wrote posts in response, which by my understanding of general usage "defined" a number of terms. I see you know how to cite a dictionary so it seems a bit odd for you to be harping in what seems a metatopical fashion on my alleged failings in this thread!?

But you were not interested in defining the terms you use... Consciousness, Synthetic Consciousness, and others.

Um, sufficiency is sufficient.

Your arguments are Unsound, they are filled with undefined terms and your metaphors do not really inform. You have alienated more posters than you've won over. The fault lies somewhere. Pick up that mirror yourself.

Won over? I had no idea this was a popularity contest, sorry. I guess I don't get the notion of Critical Thinking. Could you explain it to me please? As I see it here it seems to be largely a kind of game-playing routine consisting of poor reading habits (or deliberate misquotes etc.). Hey, that can be fun, too. Is that it? You and BillHoyt do seem to be able to do that!

...you must come out into the light Mr E. Hiding in the shadows of your mind won't get you where you want to be.

Fair enough as a maxim for those who desire enlightenment in general - would that include you, Atlas? Maybe Mr. E is hiding, or maybe he's looking into those shadows more than you could ever begin to know.

When your posts take on a flavor of misguided personal attack, and then continue that way, that's one thing. Attacking the ideas presented is another thing. To the extent that I am "defending" Synthetic Consciousness and have stated that I have also been demonstrating it in places, the line between fallacy and good point seems blurred to me so I allow some leeway in my critical judgments. I try to point out issues I see in text strings people post. A number of your posts seem to be aimed at me personally, by contrast. Maybe I'm just over-sensitive about such fine points.



ME


oops, late edition: "Your arguments are Unsound"

Which arguments? What "Unsound"? Does "Your" = "Atlas'" in that context, so that it should be read "Atlas' arguments are unsound"?

 

[Mr. E]

Re: Re: Re: Re: re "don't pretend"

Well, DNA DOES govern all build up of all tissues in the body including the brain, where our consciousness resides.

That seems fair enough in this context. I accept that personal individual consciousness cannot exist without a functioning brain of some kind, which brain somehow integrates sense data both with memory and into memory. No brain, not conscious.

Enough?

ME

 

[Jeff Corey]

So what about the bloody subconscious mind, then?

Never mind.
It doesn't matter.

 

[Mr. E]

So what about the bloody subconscious mind, then?

Never mind.
It doesn't matter.

Well, some people might hold that consciousness cannot exist except if/when "feeding" like a vampire off the blood supplied to the brain. That notion seems to apply in other virtual ways, too. I'm interested in a minimal set of of criteria for there to be a conscious non-brain with a subconscious non-brain which links it effectively into what people usually call the real world. This is not Artificial Intelligence as currently demonstrable (tho' I've been out of touch for about 7 years), thus SC.

It seems to me that there can be no consciousness without both sensation and awareness working "together". I've outlined some further thoughts on the relatively meaningful matter of relatively immaterial mind in material body in my posts to this thread.

ME

 

[hammegk]

Well, some people might hold that consciousness cannot exist except if/when "feeding" like a vampire off the blood supplied to the brain.

You maybe.

I've outlined some further thoughts on the relatively meaningful matter of relatively immaterial mind in material body in my posts to this thread.

What in Ed's name is a relatively immaterial mind?


BTW, your Turing test failure indicates to me a lack of human sentience. Are you running on a 386?

 

[Jeff Corey]

You maybe.


What in Ed's name is a relatively immaterial mind?


BTW, your Turing test failure indicates to me a lack of human sentience. Are you running on a 386?

More likely a Commodor 64.
A relatively immaterial mind is totally immaterial.

 

[Mr. E]

BTW, your Turing test failure indicates to me a lack of human sentience. Are you running on a 386?

3 not 8 of 6 cylinders, so to speak, horse sense or not, when corresponding with you, my good man. I can live with "I failed" coming from you, hammegk.

Go well in peace.

Got topic?

ME

 

[Mr. E]

More likely a Commodor 64.
A relatively immaterial mind is totally immaterial.

Oh, back to vulgar commode jokes, are we? We're talking the kitchen sink, dude, at least some of us. Get with the program!!

And have a nice silly day, too.

Got topic?

ME

PS - http://www.oldcomputers.net/c64.html