3 ms·

The real challenge here is to understand the brain, and consciousness, without putting it in computer terminology. https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-p

by odreem 9y ago

The real challenge here is to understand the brain, and consciousness, without putting it in computer terminology. https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-informati...

JepZ 9y ago
Sorry, but the author of that article clearly does not understand... It doesn't matter if humans store data the way computers do, the point is, that humans can be abstracted as state machines. Yes, humans are certainly different than our PCs today, but that does not mean that the principles are so different. E.g. humans seem to use a lot of lossy 'compression' while that is something we try to avoid in software in recent years. So we use computers for the things humans cannot do very well and therefore it appears that we are different. I think the whole discussion about putting the human mind into computer terminology is more about accepting that humans are just biological machines versus believing that humans are special because they have a soul and are different than any other animal.
- goatlover 9y ago
  Alternatively, it's a seductive metaphor because humans love to try to explain one thing in terms of another. Thus the universe is like a clock, and the laws of physics operate like clockwork. Until QM and the metaphor broke down. Similarly, the brain is like a computer. Until it's not. Interesting how nobody runs it the other way. A computer is like the brain. Why don't we? Probably because we understand computers a lot better than brains, and use that analogy to make sense of something otherwise mysterious. None of this has anything to do with a soul, btw. It's all a matter of how we think about things. The mistake is when we take our metaphors literally and try to make domain B fit into domain A, despite obvious differences. Then we end up with a convoluted view of B that's been distorted by being mapped onto A.
- odreem 9y ago
  The point, as I see it, is that we are trapped in our own paradigmatic understanding of the world, and use the most advanced metaphors we have at our disposal to conceptualize something that is still complex beyond our reach. Hilarity ensues years later when we see the body understood as steam pumps or engine valves etc (described by Zarkadakis in the essay). The challenge for us in 2017 is to not fall into the same trap and to understand consciousness in a deeper way that isn't through the lens of "wires, circuitboards, central processors, data, etc etc" Its enticing but it detracts from understanding the consciousness of all living things in a more advanced way. I am with you on your materialist presupposition, I just think we can do better. I think the de-simplification of these terminologies will actually lead to better augmented reality and better AGI.

by odreem 9y ago

JepZ 9y ago

Sorry, but the author of that article clearly does not understand... It doesn't matter if humans store data the way computers do, the point is, that humans can be abstracted as state machines. Yes, humans are certainly different than our PCs today, but that does not mean that the principles are so different. E.g. humans seem to use a lot of lossy 'compression' while that is something we try to avoid in software in recent years. So we use computers for the things humans cannot do very well and therefore it appears that we are different. I think the whole discussion about putting the human mind into computer terminology is more about accepting that humans are just biological machines versus believing that humans are special because they have a soul and are different than any other animal.

goatlover 9y ago
Alternatively, it's a seductive metaphor because humans love to try to explain one thing in terms of another. Thus the universe is like a clock, and the laws of physics operate like clockwork. Until QM and the metaphor broke down. Similarly, the brain is like a computer. Until it's not. Interesting how nobody runs it the other way. A computer is like the brain. Why don't we? Probably because we understand computers a lot better than brains, and use that analogy to make sense of something otherwise mysterious. None of this has anything to do with a soul, btw. It's all a matter of how we think about things. The mistake is when we take our metaphors literally and try to make domain B fit into domain A, despite obvious differences. Then we end up with a convoluted view of B that's been distorted by being mapped onto A.
odreem 9y ago
The point, as I see it, is that we are trapped in our own paradigmatic understanding of the world, and use the most advanced metaphors we have at our disposal to conceptualize something that is still complex beyond our reach. Hilarity ensues years later when we see the body understood as steam pumps or engine valves etc (described by Zarkadakis in the essay). The challenge for us in 2017 is to not fall into the same trap and to understand consciousness in a deeper way that isn't through the lens of "wires, circuitboards, central processors, data, etc etc" Its enticing but it detracts from understanding the consciousness of all living things in a more advanced way. I am with you on your materialist presupposition, I just think we can do better. I think the de-simplification of these terminologies will actually lead to better augmented reality and better AGI.