Buddhism and Karma (Religion)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Sunday, December 15, 2013, 04:27 (3778 days ago) @ David Turell

Agreed again, but from those automatic neurons consciousness, free will and free thought appear. And, of course, we have no idea how. And computers can't do it, and Penrose says they never will.-Well, Penrose also wasn't a computer scientist. -My more advanced studies make me tend to agree with him, truthfully. But if we think of intelligence as simply an observation of the emergent phenomenon of autonomous agents, then it is theoretically possible. -Here's one position, it isn't necessarily mine but I will state its an attractive one: We already know we can model cells, and systems of cells as boolean networks. (Boolean networks just mean that we can predictably model the behaviour of a cell with a computer.) -This suggests strongly that the human brain is itself... computable. Meaning, that since it obeys finite laws, we *should* be able to create a mathematical model of it. -Many people are staking their careers on this possibility, and I can't wait to find out the results!-
> > 
> > David: "The issue is that intelligence is part of consciousness,"
> > 
> > Matt: And I would state that I don't think we can make that case. I can write a computer program that has no consciousness, yet clearly displays intelligent behavior. How about that robot I posted about some years back that was able, by the simple act of observation, to derive Newton's equations for motion?
> 
> But it is constricted intelligent behaviour based entirely on and constrained by your programs limits. No free unrelated thought appears. Computers appear intelligent but they are simply robotic.-You're shifting the goalposts. You said that *intelligence* is part of consciousness. It's not. Free will isn't a necessary component of intelligence. From your own book, there are sufferers of OCD that clearly have their free will abrogated yet are still, in theory intelligent.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"