[Wittrs] Re: Is Computation too Static to Sustain a Mind?
- From: "BruceD" <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 00:54:13 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "c.moeller1" <cmoel888@...> wrote:
"Modern computers have not changed that ancient prohibition against
ongoing time. The program lines are a means of accessing a sequence of
logical statements, one by one. For all the rapidity that such logic can
be performed, and even while appearing to be executing dynamic
functions, each line of program directs an evaluation of static
representational logic in a timeless instance."
Let's see if I get this. I add up a column of numbers. The sum is the
sum no matter how fast I count. The sum doesn't exist in time.
> The processes that support life and the processes that life produces
are all dynamic.
Including all physical processes that occur in time. The gestation of
the fertilized egg is programmed by the DNA. The embryo becomes the
fetus in time, and ultimately the being. But although it unfolds in
time, the possibility of the product is there from the beginning. So,
something is emerging in time, dynamically, and something is the way it
always was, statically.
So, it depends upon how you want to see it. I watch the computer or the
fertilized egg do its thing and say "it all happened in time" or I can
point out that it must be what it always was because nothing new can be
added.
But now I'm not sure where to go. To me, the computer model of brain, as
a metaphor, is helpful in describing it. But how one goes from brain to
mind is the big question. Just what o you mean by "sustain?" Is it
closer to "cause" or to "responsible for?"
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
