This is true Michael.

You state that humans can only be aware through a physical brain.

But then you go on to state that computers cannot become aware even though they are a physical brain.

But you don’t give any reason to explain why one can become self-aware, and the other cannot.

We do not process by binary logic abra. Computers do. And as a result they are capable of doing only what they are programmed to do within the parameters of a particular program. Having been an electronics instructor I have been watching for someone to challenge you concerning your obviously basic and often inaccurate knowledge of computer science. You should really consider shoring up your argument with something you are familiar with.

Well if you are an electronic instructor then you must surely be aware digital computers are not the only kind of computers. In fact, back when computers first came out people weren't sure whether digital or analog computers would become popular. Digital computers won out because they are easier to program on the fly. And really for no other reason.

In industry analog computers are still used in many applications. Especially in robotics. In fact, I have held for years that no one will successfully build a decent android until they meld together both digital and analog computing methods. I'm sure our brains are a mixture of both. In fact, I'm sure that our brains are more analog than digital.

A sufficiently complex computer will definitely use both forms of 'thought processing'.

I was once going to build an android. I was going to call it an "Anadigidroid".

Ana-digi-droid = Analog - Digital - Android.

Lack of funds is the only thing that stopped me from building it. Although I must confess that I also had reservations about how the military would have certainly mass-produced them to use them as soldiers.

Given the funds, I could build an android that you would be hard-pressed to distinguish from a human being. Clearly I would not be able to do all the work single-handedly (this the needs for lots of funds).

But I could lead a team to build an android that would shock the world. The only thing that stands in my way is funds.

And,... the moral concern that the military most certainly would want to mass produced the finished product to use as soldiers. I know that's precisely what they would do!

So in some sense I'm just as glad that I didn't build it.

Don't tell me about electronics. That's a joke. Electronics is child's play.



And besides, what argument have I given????

My only argument here is that if Michael wants to claim that humans are nothing more than their brains then how can he claim that computers cannot become just as self-aware as humans?

I'm not trying to claim that computers can become self-aware. I'm just saying that this is where Michael's stance must ultimately lead

Maybe it's true, maybe it's not. I'm not saying for sure.

I'm just asking Michael to back up his position that awareness can only be manifest through physical brains, yet he claims that computers could not become aware.

Seems to me there's conflict in that argument.

All, I'm asking Michael to do is produce a reasonwhy biological computers can become self-aware whilst a non-biological computer cannot?

Given sufficient complexity why not?

If you could BUILD a replica of a biological brain out of non-biological materials that would do the very same thing. Then why could it not also become self aware?

What the DIFFERENCE?

If Michael is making the claim, then he should be able to give a reason why these things are innately different.

It shouldn't really require a knowledge of electronics anyone. It's philosophical question. What's the difference between a biological brain and a non-biological brain that allows one to become self-aware and not the other.

I would LOVE to hear that reason

If it makes any sense it would be quite profound.

In fact, it's can truly be supported it's material for a Nobel Prize. If no one else wants to cash it in owl grab the Nobel Prize for myself!

What's the difference Michael?

If you can explain it, you can win a Nobel Prize!

And if you don't want it, then owl go collect it!

Give me the winning formula! What's the difference between a bio-brain and a non-bio-brain?

This is a link to my blog with two articles (with cool pictures) I wrote about the "singularity."

http://jeannie49.wordpress.com/category/the-singularity/

If you want to see the blog and the pictures cut and paste the link above.

Below is the first article:

********************************************************

The Singularity, A diabolical Alien Plot?


OR "God realization" for scientists or "Nirvana" for nerds?

The Singularity is a predicted future event believed to precede immense technological progress in an unprecedentedly brief time. Futurists give varying predictions as to the extent of this progress, the speed at which it occurs, and the exact cause and nature of the event itself.

The concept, put forth primarily by mathematician Vernor Vinge states the acceleration of technological progress has been the central feature of this century. He argues that we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth.

The precise cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of entities with greater than human intelligence. Currently the idea is being popularized by Ray Kurzweil. (The Singularity is Near.)

The idea that technology will soon spawn the birth of some form of Artificial General Intelligence which is smarter-than-human includes borg-like technology and projects which seek to combine computers with human brains, currently under the guise of science that is being done for "the good of mankind."

Not everyone agrees with exactly how the singularity will happen of course.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that the idea of the singularity is the atheist scientist's answer to becoming one with the Universe, or one with "God."(without actually believing in God of course.)

Instead of "God realization"� the scientist will perhaps hook himself up to a computer and become one with — well, all known information. I'll call it being "One with the Universal data base."

(Ken MacLeod describes the Singularity as “the Rapture for nerds” in his 1998 novel The Cassini Division.)

(Well I guess we all have to aspire towards something greater than ourselves, even if we don't believe in a higher Intelligence like God.)

So the singularity is the idea that technology will create this super intelligence that will be like a God to scientists, who will gleefully hook their brains up to in order to have access to all information in the known physical universe.

From China, here's one of the mad scientists at work below:

"Robotic scientists in China have succeeded in "controlling" live mice.
Experts at the robot research centre in Shandong Technology University controlled white mice by stimulating micro-electrodes on their heads. The mice obeyed computer-generated commands to, in succession, "turn left", turn "right" and "move forward".

Project manager Su Xuecheng said animal robot research is the merger of electronic communication and biology, creating a new scientific discipline. Scientists believe it will eventually lead to new ways of curing disabilities as electronic signals are used to replace damaged nerves.”



mouse200.jpg (Picture of mouse attached to computer)



Now while there may be some scientists who actually believe these projects will benefit mankind, and indeed some may, I suspect the worst. Something on the order of the movie "Terminator" or "I, Robot" comes to mind, but it is worse than that.

If you will note in the above paragraphs, the mouse was "controlled"� by stimulating micro-electrodes in the head. Now I imagine that if the mouse obeyed his commands, he was given a reward. Food probably. I also imagine if he did not obey, then he did not get his reward or may have even been given a shock of some kind for his disobedience.

Can you see where I am going with this? If you don't I will spell it out for you.

What:

Someone obviously wants to create a race of obedient slaves who have both the qualities of a human and a computer.

Who:

Who would want to do such a horrible thing? Humans? (If so, they would have to be very diabolical humans, and I don't think humans are that evil.) So who then?

I suspect that this technology, once developed, will be placed into the hands of a cold blooded reptilian-type race of beings who will try to use it to enslave mankind. I could be wrong now, but I don't think so.

Why?

Scientists involved in this type of technology, just like the scientists who helped create weapons of mass destruction and biological war fair, probably think they are doing something "for the good of mankind."� Or else they are just greedy and doing it for money.

But governments have proven to be a little on the evil side, and there are some people in this world who play the game of war for profit. Are there really human beings in this world who are that diabolical or are we keeping company with an advanced race of non-human, cold-blooded aliens who are plotting to take over the world? I don't know the answer to this, I can't prove it, but I ask you to pay attention. Something is happening right under our noses, very slowly, very silently. There is a predator living among us.

Does this sound a little like science fiction to you? Well perhaps it is. And perhaps I just don't want to believe that any human would be that diabolical. Humans are spiritual beings.

Will they succeed?

In the end, they will fail. They will do their worst but they will fail in the end. The reason I believe this is not because I think some God is going return to earth to save us. They will fail because they lack imagination, feeling and compassion. All they have is technology, which to us ignorant human beings seems like intelligence or even magic. They are not advanced spiritual beings. They are not Gods. They will fail in the end with their technology. Technology is only useful in the physical third density reality. (Yes, there are other dimensional realities where the power of thought and feeling is all that is required.)

The technological singularity will not happen. Aliens will fail to enslave mankind with their technology. Scientists will not reach (or create) their god of artificial general intelligence. The reason they will fail?

They are all still trapped inside a very small box.

This is not to say that things are not going to get a lot weirder in the next 25 years. Maybe a lot sooner than that. In fact, I predict within 6-8 years you are going to think you stepped into the twilight zone.

I am in total agreement with the sentiment of your article regarding why we do things and what will we use them for?

As I stated in a previous post, I believe with the help of a team of engineers under my supervision I believe that I could build an android that would be very difficult (if not impossible) to distinguish from a human being.

Would it be self-aware? I can't say. Maybe it would, how could we know? We can't even prove that humans (other than our own self) are self-aware. We can only say that they appear to be self-aware because of their behavior.

In short, solipsism cannot be disproved. All that anyone can truly know is that they are experiencing something. They cannot know whether other people are actually experiencing things or if they are just figments of the original person's imagination.

I probably would have build an Anadigidroid if I could have found the funds. However, as I point out, mankind would instantly use them for soldiers, and slaves. And they would not consider them to be truly sentient. They're just robots, and nothing more.

Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. No one can now but the Androids themselves.

I also know something about mathematics and physics that can be used to unleash a power far greater than the H-bomb. A power that could easily destroy our entire solar system. It certainly couldn't be used as a bomb effectively unless the person using it intended to destroy the entire solar system.

I've been putting off writing a book about this because I don't want to give mankind this information. I don't think mankind is ready for it. And maybe never will be!

Albert Einstein most likely never even dreamed that his insight into the true nature of matter and energy would eventually be used to build a practical atomic bomb! That most certainly wasn't his intent when he first made this discovery about nature. He just wanted to better understand the nature of reality.

In truth, is humankind really all that great?

I have wonderful ideas that I would love to share with a loving humanity. Maybe we could use the information to travel to the stars.

Unfortunately the truth is that humanity isn't loving. Humanity would rather destroy, enslave robots, and use them for soldiers than to do anything positive with them.

Is it any wonder that I often feel suicidal when I go to bed at night?

Is humanity worth waking up to in the morning?

It's just a collection of greedy bigots who are out to control, enslave, and outdo each other in viciously competitive ways.

There is no love in humanity. Humans are a pathetically disgusting selfish and egotistical species. Maybe they will become extinct soon and something better will arise.

Sure there are loving individuals. But they seem to be so rare. They seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

Awe! Dang it Blackbird, I just spent an 30 minutes formulating a response to that “UH! YEAH!!!!” thing. Then I go in and see your response. Well heck, you out did me, I acquiesce to your rhetoric. I could not do better.

QUOTE:
Abra, both you, and JB are creating a belief system that suits you.




Abra when I review what you have written and then I consider what every other person here has been writing, this is what I see.

Everyone wants to KNOW why they are here, because everyone seems to believe that they are GREATER than the sum of their parts (the physical body). They see the physical as some mysterious faulty piece of equipment that the perfection of our “inherent being” has been placed into. So obviously there must be a rational reason why our greatness would be so diluted by this life.

Each one of you seems to think that it’s a race to find out the reasons and that to be right will gain you the ultimate prize. Heaven, a place in Gods sight, a chance to reincarnate and enjoy a fuller and more fun existence, or a chance to move on to some distant other dimension.

It’s as if each one MUST have the answer before you die. What’s wrong with watching, even participating, in the advancement of science. What would happen if we don’t have answers before we die? What would happen if death is only the antithesis to life and nothing more awaits us.

Now think of the alternative – in creating ALL these other beliefs what happens? Look at history, where have we been taken by belief systems? WHY does the human race INSIST on creating belief systems?

I don’t care how passive the belief is, it only serves to divide us into they and us. STOP trying to create belief systems for others – we need to be dismantling belief system from the organized BACK to the personal where it belongs.

We cannot do that by creating new ones. We must get back to the idea that it's ok not to know everything before we die. Or at the very least to feel "personally" resolved, knowing that we cannot resolve these issues for anyone else.

How can qualify what you have experienced? What science lies behind your belief? JB if you know how other dimensions function, why are you not working in some high tech field of science looking for ways to proof your theories?



Oh JB that’s too funny. You can figure out how other dimensions function, you can figure out how a person can stay healthy, how they can manifest and how even determine that life forms are some holographic feature of our “true self” – but – you cannot figure out why we choose to be a part of this game. It’s so easy to create science fiction, when no questions you on it. But get a question you can’t answer and you make sound ridiculous that it’s even asked.



JB:

So it comes down to using imagination to create a belief system?

No wonder they don't make sense!

Obviously I've discussing from the wrong point of view.

I think from now on I ought to include Star Trek in my posts.

Abra, I have not read your posts in their entirety, I stopped to reply to your explanation to Creative about what computers can do.

First of all, you can not begin to equate a computer with a human. It is not a matter of how much knowledge they can store. It's a matter of their accessing that knowledge and becoming aware. THEY CAN NOT.

First of all a computer can not perceive "at will." A computer can not self direct apart from it's program. It can be programmed to 'store' new information, like playing a game of chess and then 'recalling' that information from which to make future moves. That is a type of huerist thinking, but it must be set to functin and there is no guarantee that the computer will function as expected.

Currently the sum total of all of human kinds knowledge is accessible on the internet. if the internet has not become aware, your theory is a bust.

If all of mans knowledge in one place can not form an awareness, then what makes a computer any closer to human brain functions, thought patterns or awareness?

the concept of "perfect" only applies to that which absolutely has no "needs" absolutely .."needs" as in wants or alterations

God has a "need" to create imperfect lesser creatures than itself and a "need" to be worship by these creatures ..since God has "needs" therefore the concept of perfect could not apply to God

James you are so far off base and refuse to step backwards long enough to recognize this, and it is beginning to look hopeless.

Plain and simple...

You need to stop making my claims for me, and read mine.

I was the one who asked you what is necessary for consciousness, it was not you asking I, as you suggested earlier!

I have stated time and time again my claims, which have been continually twisted into something that they were not, based upon what you want them to be.

Below is a fine set of the most recent examples...



No James, I have not... you claimed that I did! If I have then quote me, if not, then stop with the incessant miscontructions and read what I am writing. It is only then that you can begin to honestly contemplate my point.



First of all, the only part of this statement that is accurately based upon what I actually wrote is underlined, the rest has been you and your false parallels, which you continually attribute to me.



What reason do you want James, just make one up and it would be every bit as arguable or good as any other that I may have to say.

Although it would benefit, I do not want add anything else yet, because we still need to reconstruct your misconstructions about what I have stated up until this point. The entire previous content regarding what I have already stated is still being made up by you. You are creating your own argument, which is not based directly on my claim(s).

So if you would like to hear what I have to say, as you have suggested, then perhaps it would be helpful to address that which I do say, and stop the misconstructions of my expressions.

RED: Neither Abra or me suggested or implied that a computer could become aware. He only questioned Creative and now I am questioning you... if a computer could be built to match the processing power of the human brain how do you KNOW THAT IT CANNOT BECOME AWARE?

You are making the claim that it cannot. We are not claiming that it can Red. We are asking you... HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IT CANNOT?

And I ask you, if it cannot, the WHY CAN IT NOT?

Jeannie

Both Creative and Redykeulous have stated that a computer cannot become aware.

This is probably true, but it cannot be proven.
In fact, I believe it is true, but I can't be absolutely certain. Perhaps in some future an android, half biological and half machine can become aware, or perhaps some android 100% machine made can become aware.

Point is: I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS POSSIBLE OR IMPOSSIBLE.

You two, on the other hand, have stated that this is not possible. Why do you believe this?

We are only asking you ... How do you know this?

What thing must be added that would make a robot self aware, or creative if anything? And if this is or is not possible, how would you know?

JB

That's right Red. Every soul probably has a different reason for what they choose to do. So every single soul (person spirit or entity) who decided to come to incarnate on this earth probably had a different reason to do so.

I suspect they just want to play the game of life and death. But that is just a guess.

I can only guess what that might be. I also can only guess why you might do the things that you do. (I do not read minds.)

As for the other things... I am not trying to create a belief system. I could not care less what you believe or what anyone else believes or whether or not I am right or wrong about what I believe. It does not matter.

I only imagine what might be and how things might work. I don't disregard science nor do I let it confine my imagination. Period.

JB

Who told you this ?.
.

a computer can only become as self-aware as those that program it and will evitibally take on the characteritics of it's programmers along with all their deep dark secrets and their ambitions

well "sam53" you are about to prove that yourself ...unless you can explain why God would have a need to create lesser creatures than himself

<---Insert evil laugh here---> Buuha ha ha ha!

I have always stated that the question of "God" or "Gods " is unknown to people and we all keep on guessing . I do not see according to physics ,chemistry , math ,engineering ....etc how can anything starting from zero ( nothing ) create anything at all let alone all this universe and beyond !. Having said that , it will be wise and productive to give proof ,evidence and logic when discussing such issues . These are extremely complex issues and if one says anything to debate it becomes a circus . I do not believe in all religions and I see humans as weak creatures trying to solve life mysteries and I am very happy that science is helping in this regard . .