|
Nudiford (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Oh, I see. I looked at your profile and you are a Christian who is out fighting the good fight against materialism. That sorta dashes my hopes that you can direct me toward anything useful and gives me some suspicion about Koch but Ill look into it anyway. I suspected you had this bias considering your implication that qualia be returned to the Platonic realm and the criticism that the mind is not computable. We must make room for God, right?
Nudiford (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I'll have to take a look at the experimental evidence you say Koch provides for qualia but I'm not sure where or how Dennett rejects Neural Darwinism, it seems you are oversimplifying his idea of the mind as turing machine. Perhaps you can point me in the right direction? I admit it's been a while since I studied this things.
Nudiford (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Oliver is there anything specific you would recommend I read to gain a better perspective on this? I am studying economics and statistics at the moment but would like to return to this subject eventually.
Oliver1456 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Nudiford Gereld Edelman came up with Neural Darwinism. This is the most accepted theory of consciousness to date. It is not computable. Can I prove the human mind trancends formal logic. Yes. quasi-symmetry was solved by Roger Penrose. The same problem can not be solved by a classical computer. Dennett says qualia dose not exist and Christof Koch says he has experimental evidence for it. Dennett science is not accurate and there is not really any major cognitive scientist that argee with him
Nudiford (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Thanks for the tip Oliver. Some years ago I was very frustrated with certain aspects of evolution, though I considered myself an evolutionist. Penrose was one of several authors I read during that time and I was very dissatisfied. It was Darwins Dangerous Idea wherein Dennett describes evolution as an algorithmic process that really clarified the evolutionary process for me. I was very grateful. I have been a Dennett fan ever since, though I am willing to look at critical reviews of Dennett.
Vanmeter815 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Dennett = nut
Oliver1456 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Nudiford Dennett Is probably one of the worste cognitive scientist living. Let me just give you a list of scientist he argues: Gereld Edelman-came up Neural Darwinism-Christof Koch, Roger Penrose, Roger Sperry, Benjamin Libet, John Searle. He argues against the existence of qualia and Christof Koch writes in his book he has evidence for it. Dennett argues we are just automations and there is much evidence against this. Machines don't past the turing test, ect... He does bad science
Twicebakedtaters (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
He separates intelligence from evolution. This is an impossibility. Nothing we do is separate from evolution. It is all part of the process.
Focusb4ufire (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I agree with him that religion is an important cultural phenomenon in the History of civilization. It could even be said that it is the predecessor of science in our attempt to understand the cosmos. However, I do not value its importance in todays teachings of how the world works or moral understanding. Religious teachings in schools should be aimed at achieving understanding and avoiding discrimination and prejudice. Biblical propaganda and dogma should not be accepted anywhere.
tulstem (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
The only religion that has not 'evolved' IS Christianity. Society has evolved.Not to mention the fact that the greatest turn-outs have not been for religious events. Try olympics, sports, soccer, football, war demonstrations, hippy movements, etc.He should have used the bible, not Rick Warren's book. There it would be found that God doesn't need us at all, but he wants to. In fact GOd chose to reject on numerous occasions people who abused his priveleges. I hated Warren's book anyway. |
