|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178061 - 11/23/13 08:41 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
salt is not aware of water when it encounters it and dissolves. hydrogen is not aware of oxygen when it encounters it and makes water. chemical and physical reactions are not awareness.
your ideas about awareness being equivalent to any particular existence defy any credibility in your endless argument.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: salt is not aware of water when it encounters it and dissolves. hydrogen is not aware of oxygen when it encounters it and makes water. chemical and physical reactions are not awareness.
your ideas about awareness being equivalent to any particular existence defy any credibility in your endless argument.
Well, I won't argue with you there..but these chemical and physical reactions don't show a trend towards greater awareness do they? Even if not...I suppose I should redefine consciousness as something we can agree on better and is less vague.
hmm what if I specified the definition more, and define consciousness as the awareness of living things which exhibit an overall trend towards greater and greater awareness through the process of living.
Credibility restored?
since included in the definition is 'living', and when an object is dead it is not said to be living therefore it accounts for the cessation of consciousness as well.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: perhaps, but let it be "progress" and don't infer that as evolution or I will become upset again
--------------------
|
Mr Person



Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 551
Loc: inner circle of fault
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178117 - 11/23/13 09:11 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Well, I won't argue with you there..but these chemical and physical reactions don't show a trend towards greater awareness do they?
Some do-- the ones that end up becoming us. But that doesn't mean it was the awareness that compelled them to more complexity. I would say it's more like it facilitated evolution than drove it.
Quote:
hTx said:
hmm what if I specified the definition more, and define consciousness as the awareness of living things which exhibit an overall trend towards greater and greater awareness through the process of living.
Credibility restored?
since included in the definition is 'living', and when an object is dead it is not said to be living therefore it accounts for the cessation of consciousness as well.
Why simplify the definition of consciousness to make it fit your conjecture? Consciousness describes something we can only know first hand. It's not even possible to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that another person is conscious, much less a virus or a plant.
You are calling awareness "consciousness" and then stretching the meaning even further by applying it to anything that responds to the environment in a seemingly aware way. Why not let "awareness" mean what it does and just say that awareness evolves into consciousness? Couldn't your theory still be expressed with that premise?
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Mr Person]
#19178148 - 11/23/13 09:24 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Note: not to Mr Person
The best backgammon program in the world was self taught using artificial neural networks (ANN). The program is taught the rules of the game and then plays against itself. In the beginning the network is randomized having some chaotic state. Even without having a clue, one side will win as backgammon is a deterministic game. That series of moves/positions leading to a win is slightly 'rewarded' or reinforced as desirable (neuronal connections are given more weight).
Repeat for 500,000 games and you have a program that 'evolved' to outplay the strongest human players.
Now while there is obviously high intelligence in designing the computer chips, software language and basic training algorithm; there is zero guidance after the program is launched. There is no consciousness steering the program to a near-optimal solution. None.
--------------------
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
none none nun.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178164 - 11/23/13 09:30 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
having the quality of consciousness enables for the exploration of the environment and enables an organism to benefit from experience, which even if only at the epigenetic level (proof was provided earlier that the environment can change dna in a living organism), still shows a trend towards greater awareness.
I think this definition fits nicely..not only as a working definition but in regards to the the initial theory of consciousness evolution..
Since all living things possess a consciousness enabling them to explore and be aware of their environment and benefit from experience resulting in an awareness that trends towards greater and greater awareness throughout the process of living in all living organisms..which in turn may increase the complexity of DNA (refer to epigenetic studies, and also http://asweknowit.ca/evcult/Complexity.shtml#conclusion), which increases the overall complexity of life (biodiversity in response to environments and reproductive patterns) further increasing the complexities of the overall process of evolution in whatever species.
Aye?
I'm tired and sleep deprived now...going to sleep and will be back later to review if the above makes any sense.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178177 - 11/23/13 09:35 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
going to sleep and will be back later to review if the above makes any sense
Nope. It still won't.
--------------------
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178181 - 11/23/13 09:36 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Why simplify the definition of consciousness to make it fit your conjecture? Consciousness describes something we can only know first hand. It's not even possible to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that another person is conscious, much less a virus or a plant.
You are calling awareness "consciousness" and then stretching the meaning even further by applying it to anything that responds to the environment in a seemingly aware way. Why not let "awareness" mean what it does and just say that awareness evolves into consciousness? Couldn't your theory still be expressed with that premise?
actually yes I suppose it could.
I suggested to myself earlier that I should be using the term 'awareness', and also that I should ditch 'consciousness' in the name of the theory and should instead call it Evolution by Means of Accelerating Complexity (whether to use increasing or accelerating I haven't decided..its easy to see the universe increases complexity but not so easy to see that this complexity increases at an accelerated rate.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178191 - 11/23/13 09:38 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
my life is very complex.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Icelander]
#19178201 - 11/23/13 09:41 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You would make a great boy scout troop leader.
--------------------
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx] 1
#19178210 - 11/23/13 09:44 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
redgreenvines said: salt is not aware of water when it encounters it and dissolves. hydrogen is not aware of oxygen when it encounters it and makes water. chemical and physical reactions are not awareness.
your ideas about awareness being equivalent to any particular existence defy any credibility in your endless argument.
Well, I won't argue with you there..but these chemical and physical reactions don't show a trend towards greater awareness do they? Even if not...I suppose I should redefine consciousness as something we can agree on better and is less vague.
hmm what if I specified the definition more, and define consciousness as the awareness of living things which exhibit an overall trend towards greater and greater awareness through the process of living.
Credibility restored?
since included in the definition is 'living', and when an object is dead it is not said to be living therefore it accounts for the cessation of consciousness as well.
not acceptible in the least way. credibility is gone and will take at least 7 years to restore. the "trend" idea (insinuating evolution in reverse) that you dangle does not improve the fact that awareness is not the same as - contacting - reacting with - abutting upon - encountering - resting on - etc. even though these are things that we can do with awareness - the property of awareness does not come for free when any molecule or cell or tissue or plant or sponge or severed hand is involved in such activity.
it is not a right of all living things to have "awareness". it does not separate from consciousness, so trying to pry it off and then get people to accept it where it does not belong so you can surprise them, voila - ergo consciousness - since you accepted awareness on the amoeba, you therefore must see that all things are conscious - ipso facto I am the most brilliant logician on the planet - no you are not!
just words to you. this thread has moved two steps back if there ever were one step forward in progress.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Mr Person



Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 551
Loc: inner circle of fault
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19178250 - 11/23/13 09:56 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
actually yes I suppose it could.
I suggested to myself earlier that I should be using the term 'awareness', and also that I should ditch 'consciousness' in the name of the theory and should instead call it Evolution by Means of Accelerating Complexity (whether to use increasing or accelerating I haven't decided..its easy to see the universe increases complexity but not so easy to see that this complexity increases at an accelerated rate.
Great! Now your next hurdle is clearing this human cognitive bias that leads you to believe that everything that seems aware, is aware.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Mr Person]
#19178280 - 11/23/13 10:07 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I'm pretty convinced that humans possess very little awareness and that only sporadically.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said:
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
redgreenvines said: salt is not aware of water when it encounters it and dissolves. hydrogen is not aware of oxygen when it encounters it and makes water. chemical and physical reactions are not awareness.
your ideas about awareness being equivalent to any particular existence defy any credibility in your endless argument.
Well, I won't argue with you there..but these chemical and physical reactions don't show a trend towards greater awareness do they? Even if not...I suppose I should redefine consciousness as something we can agree on better and is less vague.
hmm what if I specified the definition more, and define consciousness as the awareness of living things which exhibit an overall trend towards greater and greater awareness through the process of living.
Credibility restored?
since included in the definition is 'living', and when an object is dead it is not said to be living therefore it accounts for the cessation of consciousness as well.
not acceptible in the least way. credibility is gone and will take at least 7 years to restore. the "trend" idea (insinuating evolution in reverse) that you dangle does not improve the fact that awareness is not the same as - contacting - reacting with - abutting upon - encountering - resting on - etc. even though these are things that we can do with awareness - the property of awareness does not come for free when any molecule or cell or tissue or plant or sponge or severed hand is involved in such activity.
it is not a right of all living things to have "awareness". it does not separate from consciousness, so trying to pry it off and then get people to accept it where it does not belong so you can surprise them, voila - ergo consciousness - since you accepted awareness on the amoeba, you therefore must see that all things are conscious - ipso facto I am the most brilliant logician on the planet - no you are not!
just words to you. this thread has moved two steps back if there ever were one step forward in progress.
all living things, whether unconsciously or consciously, show an awareness of survival. As is proven in even the bacterium. This basic awareness has been recognized by more than just myself, as the biosurvival circuit. To deny a living things awareness of survival is to deny that things ability to live, and therefore evolve.
You never commented on the whole custom+novelty=evolution post I made in regards towards your argument involving viruses. Was this because when I apply the above into the whole idea, it works beautifully?
also I loled at the seven year credibility ban
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Note: not to Mr Person
The best backgammon program in the world was self taught using artificial neural networks (ANN). The program is taught the rules of the game and then plays against itself. In the beginning the network is randomized having some chaotic state. Even without having a clue, one side will win as backgammon is a deterministic game. That series of moves/positions leading to a win is slightly 'rewarded' or reinforced as desirable (neuronal connections are given more weight).
Repeat for 500,000 games and you have a program that 'evolved' to outplay the strongest human players.
Now while there is obviously high intelligence in designing the computer chips, software language and basic training algorithm; there is zero guidance after the program is launched. There is no consciousness steering the program to a near-optimal solution. None.
There was a programmed awareness of win and lose and which to reinforce, whether sentient or not, which led to a greater increase of awareness of how to win.
So awareness is still driving the whole operation.
I don't see your point.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Mr Person]
#19181732 - 11/24/13 08:28 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr Person said:
Quote:
hTx said:
actually yes I suppose it could.
I suggested to myself earlier that I should be using the term 'awareness', and also that I should ditch 'consciousness' in the name of the theory and should instead call it Evolution by Means of Accelerating Complexity (whether to use increasing or accelerating I haven't decided..its easy to see the universe increases complexity but not so easy to see that this complexity increases at an accelerated rate.
Great! Now your next hurdle is clearing this human cognitive bias that leads you to believe that everything that seems aware, is aware.
give one single piece of evidence that I have displayed this type of bias because I haven't. Life is obviously aware, and to believe otherwise is an obvious flaw in logic, since life must have awareness to live.
Give me evidence that a living thing can survive without any awareness whatsoever and ill admit that I am wrong. The burden of proof lies on both you and rgv since you are making a claim which isn't supported by any single science, philosophy, or anything. seems a wild claim to say life has no awareness.
the theory is called Evolution by Means of Accelerating Complexity. This theory involves the entire universe and also that awareness is primary for this to occur when evolution gets to the point of life.
seems much more logical this way, especially in regards to explaining the complexity of humanity and accounts for the fact that technology isn't just something that happened with humanity randomly, but is actually apart of evolution as a whole. evolution by means of natural selection obviously falls apart when it comes to humanity and to exclude humanity from the theory is illogical, therefore Darwin's observations of animals adapted to there environment and reproductive prowess were explained by an obviously flawed theory.
Mine is simple and explains a lot more while also encompassing much more than organism-environment as the sole reason for evolution.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19181754 - 11/24/13 08:39 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I am getting the distinct feeling this is going to be another Teknix type thread.
We're all home for the hollidaze.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19181766 - 11/24/13 08:44 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
with regards to reversing entropy, we now have a reason for the existence of life and the evolution of awareness to that of consciousness, self-consciousness, and free-willed consciousness.
as is observed in the evolutionary history of life leading up to humanity.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19181768 - 11/24/13 08:45 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You can't reverse entropy in the long run. It always wins. You have no idea how good that is. Life, as is, sucks much of the time.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
|