[Wittrs] Is Homeostasis the Answer? (Re: Variations in the Idea of Consciousness)
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:03:22 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "SWM" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:
> On the use of "mechanism" I have invoked, the movement of the stream
> involves some mechanism, too, in this case the way(s) in which the
> molecular constituents of the stream operate at a deeper level. But
> one could also speak of a stream's mechanism in more macro terms,
> e.g., by referring to its behavioral tendencies.
I think you are mostly confusing yourself here.
The point is that we make our machines to follow our rules, and to
resist external influence. And sure, the resistance is not unlimited,
and a strong enough external influence can change it. So trains can
derail, but not easily.
Adaptive things are far more sensitive to small changes in the
environment.
In some sense, we can be conscious to our world because we are
sensitive to small changes in our world. The computer is unconscious,
and essentially solipsistic, because it is largely oblivious to small
changes in the world.
> If the homeostatic system's adaptive behavior is a function of
> the operating mechanics of its constituents, which is hardly
> an unreasonable supposition given what we know of chemistry and
> physics, then there is no reason to presume that "adaptiveness"
> is a stand-alone or otherwise basic competitor of "caused behaviors".
I'm not sure what point you are making there. I have never suggested
that homeostatic systems are exempt from causation.
> In keeping with what I've already said, it seems to me that the
> distinction you are making is wrongheaded. Whatever is adaptive is
> so because of its underlying mechanisms which are describable as
> algorithms (sets of procedural steps).
I challenge you to accurately describe the adaptiveness in terms of
algorithms.
> Anyway, and in keeping with my question, is the breakdown of the
> underlying relations, relative to how we get consciousness, that
> you want to give the following then:
> Homeostasis produces Pragmatic Selection produces Perception produces
> Adaptiveness produces Consciousness?
No, that's far too simplistic. Homeostasis provide a way of making
pragmatic judgments, but is not necessarily pragmatic on its own
account. Pragmatic judgment provides a way of making the decisions
needed to construct a perceptual system, but pragmatic judgment does
not necessarily lead to perception. Perception is a requirement for
consciousness, but perceiving systems are not necessarily conscious.
Regards,
Neil
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
