On 2/2/12, David Harding <davidjharding@gmai...> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> I think consciousness is ability to respond to DQ. What's wrong with this
> I find it difficult to separate ourselves from DQ in that way. As I
> see it, our consciousness is DQ in action. We cannot isolate
> ourselves from a DQ world, in my opinion. It presents a false
> dichotomy as far as I can tell.
> Well imho - here is the whole perspective issue once again. From the
> perspective of DQ you're right. The sq DQ division is a false dichotomy.
> But here we are talking about things, so from this everyday sq perspective
> the DQ sq dichotomy is not false in fact it is a very good distinction and
> explains fundamental reality very accurately.
> If we use a waterfall analogy, consciouness is the water falling. The
> incomming sensory input is the river leading up to the fall. The
> drop-off at the cliff is our ability to generate consciousness.
> However, this ability is a dynamic process and is fully imbued with
> Here you seem to be equating DQ with change. DQ isn't 'change'.
> Consciousness could possibly be separated from memory, which would
> imply that consciouness could only exist in the present moment in a
> timeless dimension. We can be conscious of a memory, as in
> consciously remembering. Hmm... the word conscious is begining to
> look awfully weird to me. I had better stop here.
> I think a good way to look at consciousness is in the area of AI on
> computers. Computers can recollect ideas and information for us so in one
> sense if 'recollection' is all that consciousness is then computers are
> conscious. But this to me isn't the best perspective of consciousness. When
> we say something is conscious we actually mean that thing can respond to
> DQ, that is; it can respond to undefined betterness and improve the ideas
> it already has. Computers cannot do this without human intervention so by
> this definition computers aren't conscious.
> I am always open to ideas on con-shessness,
> Okay what do you think of the simple definition I offered?
I find it insufficient for the reasons I presented. If you would
explain what you mean then perhaps I may feel differently. I am not
sure your definition is so simple, since it begs many questions.