Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists

On Mar 26, 10:17 pm, someone2 <glenn.spig...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 27 Mar, 01:59, brog...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:



On Mar 27, 7:14 am, someone2 <glenn.spig...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 27 Mar, 00:02, brog...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Mar 27, 3:28 am, someone2 <glenn.spig...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

.>

So you are saying that if a system had a first person perspective, and
each of the nodes was fed its individual pixel from the camera, that
no further physical interaction between any of the 100 nodes and the
rest of the system would be required, the system would know what the
information was in each of the 100 nodes in the sense that it could
have a first person perspective of the picture.

Bingo!

The nodes are already linked and are "inside" the "I". There is not a
need to feed all their input into one central, master, superduper
node. That does not mean that the nodes are not connected; there are
all sorts of connections. But nothing has to come together in one,
single spot to generate a FPP.

If I see a baseball coming at me, in fact, it is much more than a
simple question of pixels; there are edge detectors, color detectors,
motion detectors, modules that predict the expected path, etc. Then
there are connections to language centers (so I shout "hey, who threw
that?"), connections to social agent detectors so I can, later, try to
figure out whether it was thrown in anger or as a joke, connections to
motor centers so I can either duck or catch the ball, more connections
to language centers so I can tell a story to myself about what just
happened. All those things are going on; they all interact to a
greater or lesser extent, but they do not all "report" to a central
node in which a spiritual homunculus evaluates all the reports. The
unity is simply physical; all those things are happening in the same
body. That's the physical basis of the FPP.

There is a "binding problem", but it is a technical problem in
neurobiology, not a deep philosophical problem that points to
spiritualism.

The nodes aren't physically linked though are they. The camera just
set their state by laser (assume you have been following the
converstation). So what links them, other than they are decreed to
come under the "system" label. I have a first person perspective, if
it was decreed some else's brain was part of the same system as mine,
then would I gain telepathy, or would they have to also decree it, or
maybe get some physicalist professors to declare it? I had suggested
no physical linkage, or form of communication and you replied "bingo".

I lost your meaning, because earlier you seemed concerned that it was
a problem some activity would have to happen in multiple nodes
simultaneously. If you stipulate that there are no connections or
interactions betwen the nodes then, no, you'll only have a bunch of
separate light detectors. So what?

We are claiming that the FPP arises from the distributed activity of a
bunch of distinct, but interacting nodes, and that the results of that
activity do not need to be funnelled into a single central node, for
the FPP to be there.

Ah ok, so you are saying that if a system had a first person
perspective, and each of the nodes was fed its individual pixel from
the camera, that if there was no further physical interaction between
any of the 100 nodes and the rest of the system, that the system
wouldn't know what the information was in each of the 100 nodes in the
sense that it could have a first person perspective of the picture.
That some form of communication would be required. Otherwise it would
be silly. So how about the nodes were linked into a circle, and each
communicated its contents clockwise to its neighbour, such that after
the communication its neighbour held its contents, and its neighbour's
neighbour held the neighbours former contents, and so on. Would that
solve the issue and allow the system to have a first person
perspective of the picture? Is there some endpoint the information
would need to turn up at?

To have an FPP the nodes need to be linked because a set of neurons
does not a neural network make. Make a network and you have the
potential to have an FPP, and the FPP will be some part of that
network. Now, put a picture distributed across 100 nodes in that
network that is the FPP. Lo, they do no need to communicate anything
along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. The
picture is already in the FPP -- in the network. So yes, the nodes
have to be connected, but that's so you can actually have a neural
NETWORK and some hope of having a general FPP and sense of "I". Once
you have those connections the 100 nodes don't need to communicate
anything along any of those connections to "communicate the picture"
to the "I", since the "I" already has the picture.

Communication is necessary for the general FPP, the "I", to exist.
Communication is not necessary for that FPP to have an FPP of the
picture. So yes the nodes have to be connected, but no they don't have
to communicate along those connections. The reasons for connections
and (lack of) communication are different.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... there are connections to language centers (so I shout "hey, ... That's the physical basis of the FPP. ... sense that it could have a first person perspective of the picture. ... That some form of communication would be required. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... there are connections to language centers (so I shout "hey, ... and each of the nodes was fed its individual pixel from ... sense that it could have a first person perspective of the picture. ... That some form of communication would be required. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... does not a neural network make. ... potential to have an FPP, and the FPP will be some part of that ... along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... does not a neural network make. ... potential to have an FPP, and the FPP will be some part of that ... along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Problem for physicalist evolutionists
    ... does not a neural network make. ... potential to have an FPP, and the FPP will be some part of that ... along any of those network connections to "assemble" the picture. ...
    (talk.origins)