Peter Soderqvist
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2001
- Messages
- 305
TO DYMANIC
Soderqvist1: I was too broad in my definition; I didn't mean the large stretches of inert unread chromosomes this kind of inertness are not the "recessive kind"! I mean that in the double helix, chromosome 12a, and 12b, loci X and Y. Hence X brown is dominant when Y is blue. Two recessive blue, one on X and one on Y is read. But what happens when other colors are involved say X black, and Y green? Something intermediary, or fractionally can be the outcome. Y is recessive when its reading ratio is lower than 50% or zero, as far as I have understood!
Soderqvist1: Ditto!
Soderqvist1: genetic driven behavior is algorithmic!
Human strollers in a city doesn't know exactly what steps their feet has taken under the strolling either, because their feet has simply unconsciously carried out the algorithm, just as our hands do it by themselves when we write messages in this forum! Frankly, we lose our ability to write if we think too much about it, somehow the algorithm disturbs by conscious intervention! Just as school boys under oral exam who thinks too much about what to say, can suffer from tongue-tied-ness! The remedy is: don't think, do it!
Soderqvist1: Yes, the Turing machine carries out its algorithms!
Chaotic behavior like strolling is unpredictable, but walking from our home to our work is a volitional act, yet our particular steeps are still unpredictable, but our work is anyway consciously reached!
Soderqvist1: My proposal is that the genes exert phenotypic behavior, that behavior is more or less modified by the environment, for instance prenatal development need the environment!
Soderqvist1: I simply don't know!
But the sum is bigger than its component parts, in a complex system, because a complex system raises emergent properties, which cannot be found in its individual elements. For instance a vortex in your bathtub cannot be understood from the knowledge of the properties, of the molecules, which makes up the water! Because interaction between these indefinitely many molecules rises emergent properties (a vortex), which can only be understood on higher level, or order, namely, at the laws of fluid dynamics.
A single ant is considered as automaton and has only 6 ways to signalizing to his fellows, and is considered unconscious by the biologists. But interactions between ants in an anthill is very complex, for instance some ant species takes other ants as slaves, and some of these ants are "farmers" and cultivates fungus, and other keep aphids as domestics, and milking them, etc! These emergent properties cannot be found in a single ant's psychology, not in its physiology either! Natural selection made the human brain big, but most of our mental properties, and potentials may be emergent properties, as a consequence of building a device with such a structural complexity!
All this seems to suggest that consciousness is an emergent property, just as Hofstadter & Dennett has said in the Mind's I. Ants in the anthill, and neurons in the brain is analogous, and the anthill is an individual, eloquently named; Anthillary! It is a very well known fact that introversion wear down, or disturb a learned pattern, how can it be so if complexity generates consciousness; that the conscious decision to learn to write existed before the learned pattern, and that it is impossible to learn a complex task let's say writing without consciousness, but afterward when writing is learned and thus automaton, and we simply just do it by habit, the complex mental pattern cannot endure conscious awareness anymore?
I will be back at Monday!
Soderqvist1: I was too broad in my definition; I didn't mean the large stretches of inert unread chromosomes this kind of inertness are not the "recessive kind"! I mean that in the double helix, chromosome 12a, and 12b, loci X and Y. Hence X brown is dominant when Y is blue. Two recessive blue, one on X and one on Y is read. But what happens when other colors are involved say X black, and Y green? Something intermediary, or fractionally can be the outcome. Y is recessive when its reading ratio is lower than 50% or zero, as far as I have understood!
Soderqvist1: Ditto!
Soderqvist1: genetic driven behavior is algorithmic!
Human strollers in a city doesn't know exactly what steps their feet has taken under the strolling either, because their feet has simply unconsciously carried out the algorithm, just as our hands do it by themselves when we write messages in this forum! Frankly, we lose our ability to write if we think too much about it, somehow the algorithm disturbs by conscious intervention! Just as school boys under oral exam who thinks too much about what to say, can suffer from tongue-tied-ness! The remedy is: don't think, do it!
Soderqvist1: Yes, the Turing machine carries out its algorithms!
Chaotic behavior like strolling is unpredictable, but walking from our home to our work is a volitional act, yet our particular steeps are still unpredictable, but our work is anyway consciously reached!
Soderqvist1: My proposal is that the genes exert phenotypic behavior, that behavior is more or less modified by the environment, for instance prenatal development need the environment!
Soderqvist1: I simply don't know!
But the sum is bigger than its component parts, in a complex system, because a complex system raises emergent properties, which cannot be found in its individual elements. For instance a vortex in your bathtub cannot be understood from the knowledge of the properties, of the molecules, which makes up the water! Because interaction between these indefinitely many molecules rises emergent properties (a vortex), which can only be understood on higher level, or order, namely, at the laws of fluid dynamics.
A single ant is considered as automaton and has only 6 ways to signalizing to his fellows, and is considered unconscious by the biologists. But interactions between ants in an anthill is very complex, for instance some ant species takes other ants as slaves, and some of these ants are "farmers" and cultivates fungus, and other keep aphids as domestics, and milking them, etc! These emergent properties cannot be found in a single ant's psychology, not in its physiology either! Natural selection made the human brain big, but most of our mental properties, and potentials may be emergent properties, as a consequence of building a device with such a structural complexity!
All this seems to suggest that consciousness is an emergent property, just as Hofstadter & Dennett has said in the Mind's I. Ants in the anthill, and neurons in the brain is analogous, and the anthill is an individual, eloquently named; Anthillary! It is a very well known fact that introversion wear down, or disturb a learned pattern, how can it be so if complexity generates consciousness; that the conscious decision to learn to write existed before the learned pattern, and that it is impossible to learn a complex task let's say writing without consciousness, but afterward when writing is learned and thus automaton, and we simply just do it by habit, the complex mental pattern cannot endure conscious awareness anymore?
I will be back at Monday!