Watch this.
And then watch this.
2009/09/24
2009/09/18
A Brief Analogy
I guess to put it really briefly, what I was saying in my previous post is that I think you could make an analogy as follows:
Genes are to Life as Memes are to Consciousness.
Obviously there are some problems with this analogy, but I think it's interesting as a thought experiment.
Genes are to Life as Memes are to Consciousness.
Obviously there are some problems with this analogy, but I think it's interesting as a thought experiment.
2009/09/13
Consciousness and Life
A few days ago I had a lengthy discussion about consciousness. The result has been a mild obsession recently with the topic. I would much appreciate any comments anyone has on the subject.
To understand my view of consciousness, you first should know what Biological Naturalism is, as this is the closest view to mine that I've found. I used to think I was a materialist, but materialists deny the existence of a non reducible property of consciousness. Meanwhile, there is dualism. I haven't been a dualist since I was a kid. Dualism is hard to justify when one does not believe in the supernatural.
Biological Naturalism states that consciousness is a biological property, like digestion or photosynthesis. But unlike those properties, it is ontologically irreducible.
... pause for effect ...
If you answered "life" then maybe you already know where I'm going with this (If you're totally lost I recommend reading some of Searle's work). Bells rang in my head when I made this connection, and I'm sure I haven't been the first. Not only do life and consciousness share this rare quality of being ontologically irreducible, and being physical properties (as opposed to epiphenomenal phenomena, like a rainbow or a sunset), but they alone also share something else that is very important: replicators.
Life is a medium of physical replicators (in the case of life on earth, genes). Replicators, in the sense I use the word, undergo copying, selection and variation. Consciousness is, and I think should be defined as, a medium for memetic replicators. A meme, in my definition, is anything that is imitated. Memes, like genes, undergo selection, variation and copying.
This theory puts a lot of the puzzle pieces into place and answers the following questions. When did consciousness first emerge? Are animals conscious? Can computers become conscious?
The first two can be answered together. As soon as animals develop the higher brain functions necessary for imitation, they contain a rudimentary form of consciousness. When a bird hears a song from it's same species it may imitate the song, copying the meme. It may miss hear, or simply make a mistake, introducing variation, and through selection, only some songs will persist over time. This rudimentary consciousness is like looking on the ancient earth at replicators first evolving. It took billions of years for life to develop into a state with so few mutations as we have today. At the start, mutations were most likely frequent and extreme, as they are with many memes. But as some genes developed to produce proteins that repair DNA, some memes produce ways of maintaining themselves as well (language, writing, and eventually electronic storage, for example).
Currently computers and machines are used to copy memes, but the variation and selection is still almost exclusively done in the brain. You could think of these memes stored in a computer as an equivalent to viruses. Viruses are not widely considered alive, despite having genes and undergoing selection. Similarly, media can contain memes, but the variation and selection is not yet done by computers. I disagree with Susan Blackmore's prediction of "temes" as a new replicator, because I do not believe memes need be in a biological brain. What she calls temes I call memes that exist entirely in computers.
When computers start to not only copy, but select and vary memes, whether intelligently or not, they will on a certain level become conscious. This scares a lot of people, and perhaps it should. Memes existing entirely in computers would have protection from mutations in the way that they do not have in the human brain. It is like we are witnessing the transition of simple replicators to single celled organisms, in that the level of self sustainability will dramatically increase. Why should we be scared? Because we don't see any self sustaining replicators outside of cells anymore. The success of the cell eliminated all the competition.
To understand my view of consciousness, you first should know what Biological Naturalism is, as this is the closest view to mine that I've found. I used to think I was a materialist, but materialists deny the existence of a non reducible property of consciousness. Meanwhile, there is dualism. I haven't been a dualist since I was a kid. Dualism is hard to justify when one does not believe in the supernatural.
Biological Naturalism states that consciousness is a biological property, like digestion or photosynthesis. But unlike those properties, it is ontologically irreducible.
Solidity can be ontologically reduced to molecular behavior and consciousness cannot be reduced to neuronal behavior. To put the point more precisely, in the case of solidity the fact that we can give a complete causal explanation of solidity in terms of micro physical processes leads us to say that solidity is nothing but a certain sort of microphysical phenomenon. Causal reduction leads to ontological reduction. But in the case of consciousness we are unwilling to make the ontological reduction. Consciousness is entirely caused by neuronal behavior, but all the same we are unwilling to say that consciousness is nothing but neuronal behavior. (Searle 2004, Biological Naturalism)So to understand where I begin to differ with Searle, consider the question "What else is an ontologically irreducible biological* property?"
... pause for effect ...
If you answered "life" then maybe you already know where I'm going with this (If you're totally lost I recommend reading some of Searle's work). Bells rang in my head when I made this connection, and I'm sure I haven't been the first. Not only do life and consciousness share this rare quality of being ontologically irreducible, and being physical properties (as opposed to epiphenomenal phenomena, like a rainbow or a sunset), but they alone also share something else that is very important: replicators.
Life is a medium of physical replicators (in the case of life on earth, genes). Replicators, in the sense I use the word, undergo copying, selection and variation. Consciousness is, and I think should be defined as, a medium for memetic replicators. A meme, in my definition, is anything that is imitated. Memes, like genes, undergo selection, variation and copying.
This theory puts a lot of the puzzle pieces into place and answers the following questions. When did consciousness first emerge? Are animals conscious? Can computers become conscious?
The first two can be answered together. As soon as animals develop the higher brain functions necessary for imitation, they contain a rudimentary form of consciousness. When a bird hears a song from it's same species it may imitate the song, copying the meme. It may miss hear, or simply make a mistake, introducing variation, and through selection, only some songs will persist over time. This rudimentary consciousness is like looking on the ancient earth at replicators first evolving. It took billions of years for life to develop into a state with so few mutations as we have today. At the start, mutations were most likely frequent and extreme, as they are with many memes. But as some genes developed to produce proteins that repair DNA, some memes produce ways of maintaining themselves as well (language, writing, and eventually electronic storage, for example).
Currently computers and machines are used to copy memes, but the variation and selection is still almost exclusively done in the brain. You could think of these memes stored in a computer as an equivalent to viruses. Viruses are not widely considered alive, despite having genes and undergoing selection. Similarly, media can contain memes, but the variation and selection is not yet done by computers. I disagree with Susan Blackmore's prediction of "temes" as a new replicator, because I do not believe memes need be in a biological brain. What she calls temes I call memes that exist entirely in computers.
When computers start to not only copy, but select and vary memes, whether intelligently or not, they will on a certain level become conscious. This scares a lot of people, and perhaps it should. Memes existing entirely in computers would have protection from mutations in the way that they do not have in the human brain. It is like we are witnessing the transition of simple replicators to single celled organisms, in that the level of self sustainability will dramatically increase. Why should we be scared? Because we don't see any self sustaining replicators outside of cells anymore. The success of the cell eliminated all the competition.
2009/09/08
A couple links
This [subnormality] is great. I always wondered why so many of my friends and even some family members like professional sports so much. Playing is one thing.. or rooting for friends, but I've never gotten into prof sports. I even tried to get into them so I could have something to talk about with "the guys".
Also.. I think I've been living in Japan too long because it took me a while to figure out why this [failblog] was supposed to be funny.
Also.. I think I've been living in Japan too long because it took me a while to figure out why this [failblog] was supposed to be funny.
2009/08/16
Summer Update and My Game
I haven't updated my blog in a while, so I thought I'd say something about what I've been doing lately. So far this summer I went to Karuizawa and Izu. Tomorrow I leave for Kiyosato for a week to teach English at a camp for kids. I did it last year and it was pretty fun. Tomorrow is also the 3 year anniversary of my first day in Japan! It's hard to believe.
The past month or 2 I've been working a lot on making a web-based turn-based strategy game. The original goal was to make a mock-up game to test the rules for a possible board game, but now I've taken it in a new direction. The ultimate goal now is to adapt it for Facebook and play with family and friends.
The idea of the game is simple: Each player has robots. The robots are given orders and carry them out simultaneously. The catch is that you have to tell the robot what to do in advance, therefore trying to predict what your opponents will do. I want to do things like capture the flag later, but at the moment the object is to just take out all the opponents.
All the art work is done by me. For those who are curious, I'm coding it entirely in Ruby on Rails and Javascript. I'm using the YUI library for a lot of things including animation and ajax. Check out these screen shots from my latest version. I'm hoping to get a version online soon, but I'll be busy the rest of the month so it might have to wait until September.
The past month or 2 I've been working a lot on making a web-based turn-based strategy game. The original goal was to make a mock-up game to test the rules for a possible board game, but now I've taken it in a new direction. The ultimate goal now is to adapt it for Facebook and play with family and friends.
The idea of the game is simple: Each player has robots. The robots are given orders and carry them out simultaneously. The catch is that you have to tell the robot what to do in advance, therefore trying to predict what your opponents will do. I want to do things like capture the flag later, but at the moment the object is to just take out all the opponents.
All the art work is done by me. For those who are curious, I'm coding it entirely in Ruby on Rails and Javascript. I'm using the YUI library for a lot of things including animation and ajax. Check out these screen shots from my latest version. I'm hoping to get a version online soon, but I'll be busy the rest of the month so it might have to wait until September.
2009/04/14
2009/04/05
Open-mindedness
This pretty much says it all folks.
An important point: Believing something does not exist is not the same thing as saying it does not exist. This is a common misconception of atheism.
An important point: Believing something does not exist is not the same thing as saying it does not exist. This is a common misconception of atheism.
2009/03/28
What would you do?
On a hidden camera show a gay couple crashes a bar to see how homophobic people are.
It went much better than I expected. It was actually pretty encouraging, but I wonder what the results would be in other cities or even other countries.
It went much better than I expected. It was actually pretty encouraging, but I wonder what the results would be in other cities or even other countries.
2009/02/07
Teaching Practices
According to Bill Gates, many schools in America don't allow the principal to come watch classes without prior notice, and no more than once or twice a year. I always wondered about this, because I don't really remember how things were when I was a kid in terms of people watching the classes. The system here in Japan is drastically different:
1. The Principal visits every teacher without notice once a month. He does a review of their lesson and teaching style and gives them input afterwords.
2. There are a few days every quarter that are like an open house. Unlike the after school open house in the US, these are during school hours and last for 3 days (all these numbers vary by the area, but this is the general idea). The parents come and go as they please and can sit in on the classes.
3. There are study lessons throughout the year. One teacher will prepare a special lesson (sometimes it will be team teaching), and they present the lesson with all the other teachers watching. They all stand in the back wearing suits holding clipboards, and someone usually has a camera. Often times there will be a high level official there from the board of education, and after the lesson, which is usually after lunch on a half day, there is a long meeting to discuss the class. These lessons are sometimes for the teacher to show techniques to the other teachers, or for the other teachers to critique the main teacher. There are themes, like team teaching, or science projects. I've done quite a few of these where the theme is usually team teaching. I'm supposed to be an assistant teacher, and this is usually the only time that's true.
4. In some schools, including both of mine, there is one day a year during which the entire school is open to the public. Parents come, teachers from neighboring schools come (for 5th and 6th period, so all their kids have gone home), and anyone off the street can come in and watch the lessons or look at things the students have made in the hallways. I've never had a lesson during one of these, but I've been to a couple and it's quite an experience.
The level of accountability and the lack of reward for good teaching in the US is depressing. It's amazing that good teachers exist at all, frankly.
1. The Principal visits every teacher without notice once a month. He does a review of their lesson and teaching style and gives them input afterwords.
2. There are a few days every quarter that are like an open house. Unlike the after school open house in the US, these are during school hours and last for 3 days (all these numbers vary by the area, but this is the general idea). The parents come and go as they please and can sit in on the classes.
3. There are study lessons throughout the year. One teacher will prepare a special lesson (sometimes it will be team teaching), and they present the lesson with all the other teachers watching. They all stand in the back wearing suits holding clipboards, and someone usually has a camera. Often times there will be a high level official there from the board of education, and after the lesson, which is usually after lunch on a half day, there is a long meeting to discuss the class. These lessons are sometimes for the teacher to show techniques to the other teachers, or for the other teachers to critique the main teacher. There are themes, like team teaching, or science projects. I've done quite a few of these where the theme is usually team teaching. I'm supposed to be an assistant teacher, and this is usually the only time that's true.
4. In some schools, including both of mine, there is one day a year during which the entire school is open to the public. Parents come, teachers from neighboring schools come (for 5th and 6th period, so all their kids have gone home), and anyone off the street can come in and watch the lessons or look at things the students have made in the hallways. I've never had a lesson during one of these, but I've been to a couple and it's quite an experience.
The level of accountability and the lack of reward for good teaching in the US is depressing. It's amazing that good teachers exist at all, frankly.
2009/02/02
I don't have this gene
But I think some of my siblings do.
Link
Most experts now agree that crossed wires in the brain are probably responsible for the photic sneeze reflex.
A sneeze is usually triggered by an irritation in the nose, which is sensed by the trigeminal nerve, a cranial nerve responsible for facial sensation and motor control. This nerve is in close proximity to the optic nerve, which senses, for example, a sudden flood of light entering the retina. As the optic nerve fires to signal the brain to constrict the pupils, the theory goes, some of the electrical signal is sensed by the trigeminal nerve and mistaken by the brain as an irritant in the nose. Hence, a sneeze.
Link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)