3 ms·
True. But only if the "levels" are identified correctly. Using the language of s/w: in your design, you have to define proper layers - not too many, not too fe
by resource0x 8y ago
True. But only if the "levels" are identified correctly.
Using the language of s/w: in your design, you have to define proper layers - not too many, not too few. As opposed to trying to express everything directly in terms of assembly codes, without formalizing the intermediate concepts.
The author's point (IMO) is that if we want to learn anything about our intelligence, we need to explore an obvious path: study the intelligence of cells first.
This doesn't eliminate the importance of other levels. There can be, in turn, something inside the cell that is crucial to its "intelligence", who knows? But first thing first :)
- RosanaAnaDana 8y agoIts pretty clear that the author of the paper comes from either a non-scientific or a barely scientific background on writing style alone, but I think in broad strokes, the point absolutely stands, and its a point that keeps me up at night. Intelligence (or 'mind') is an emergent property of cells (or maybe even of compartmentalization). While its clearly been useful to study intelligence a level above cells (networks), in biological systems, multicellularity and thus networks are emergent properties of individual cells. We currently ignore the function of individual cellular intelligence in the models we develop based on biological frameworks.