4 ms·

> emergent property of complex-but-deterministic actions and reactions I think you mean non-deterministic. The last century of physics was dominated by work sh

by jocaal 3y ago

> emergent property of complex-but-deterministic actions and reactions I think you mean non-deterministic. The last century of physics was dominated by work showing how deterministic systems emerged from non-deterministic foundations. It seems that probability and statistics were the branches of maths behind everything. Who would have thought.

function_seven 3y ago
Thanks. I did actually mean to use "deterministic", but only as it sits in opposition to "free will". Is there a better word for what I meant? Of course there is randomness as well. So, yeah, I should clarify: We don't impose upon the world any kind of "uncaused cause", even if it feels like we do. Everything we think and do is a direct result of some other action. Sometimes that action can trace its lineage to a random particle decay. (Maybe—ultimately—all of them can?) Maybe we even have a source of True Randomness inherent in our minds. But even so, that doesn't lend any support to the common notion of our minds and consciousnesses as being somehow separate from the physical world or the chains of information that run through everything.
- jocaal 3y ago
  I get what you are saying. I was just thinking about the stochastic parrot analogy for consciousness, but I see your comment is more about there not being special sauce to conciousness. But hey, the fact that such behaviour can emerge from simple processes is still pretty damn cool.
dale_glass 3y ago
I think "deterministic" is the more correct option. Yes, of course deep down there's unimaginable numbers of atoms randomly bumping around. But so far everything suggests that biological organisms do their damnedest to abstract that away and operate on a deterministic basis. Think like how you keep changing -- gaining and losing cells, changing chemical balance, and on the whole it takes a lot of damage, even brain damage, to produce measurable results.

by jocaal 3y ago

function_seven 3y ago

Thanks. I did actually mean to use "deterministic", but only as it sits in opposition to "free will". Is there a better word for what I meant? Of course there is randomness as well. So, yeah, I should clarify: We don't impose upon the world any kind of "uncaused cause", even if it feels like we do. Everything we think and do is a direct result of some other action. Sometimes that action can trace its lineage to a random particle decay. (Maybe—ultimately—all of them can?) Maybe we even have a source of True Randomness inherent in our minds. But even so, that doesn't lend any support to the common notion of our minds and consciousnesses as being somehow separate from the physical world or the chains of information that run through everything.

jocaal 3y ago
I get what you are saying. I was just thinking about the stochastic parrot analogy for consciousness, but I see your comment is more about there not being special sauce to conciousness. But hey, the fact that such behaviour can emerge from simple processes is still pretty damn cool.

dale_glass 3y ago

I think "deterministic" is the more correct option. Yes, of course deep down there's unimaginable numbers of atoms randomly bumping around. But so far everything suggests that biological organisms do their damnedest to abstract that away and operate on a deterministic basis. Think like how you keep changing -- gaining and losing cells, changing chemical balance, and on the whole it takes a lot of damage, even brain damage, to produce measurable results.