Obe, you are conflating simulating with emulating. A simulation uses a proposed model to stand in for or represent a real entity and projects behavior based on presumed principles. An emulation uses artificial stimulations to trigger natural responses. The parts of the brain doing the thinking are the same parts that respond to real stimulation except the reactive output is turned off, else the person “sleep walks”, acting out his thoughts (such as talking to oneself out loud) or is “delusional”, not being able to distinguish real stimulation from his own artificial stimulation. That is why those maladies exist.
And no offense intended, but this whole issue of how the brain thinks is not really a philosophical issue any more. It is a hardcore engineering fact. There is actually very little mystery about it. Recursive, recurrent, and forwardfeeding processes are simply the way neural networks function, whether organic or mechanical. It doesn’t matter what we would like or fancifully imagine might be taking place. There is nothing that a human brain does that an artificial brain (a neural network) hasn’t been designed to replicate and surpass.
When they finally get to the point of allowing you to see what real neural androids can do, it is going to make you feel so mentally handicapped that it is going to scare and depress you pretty seriously. They very seriously don’t need You.
In Your previous posts You indicated semantic differences as significant, and the next blog dismissed any philosophical implications within the study of mind, based on the idea, that more and more emphasis is shifting toward the mechanistic wired in views of brain function, away from the neurological-psychological interpretation.
I tend to agree with You, but only with the following caveat. The fact that evolution has advanced to the point where brain function has been transplanted to the machine. The fact is that it was the human brain which thought of the computer is significant, because it was within the potential of the human brain to come up with it. The computer may be looked at as the evolutionary extension of the brain, and even if, the capabilities of the computer far exceed in certain functions, it is to the credit of the human brain that this became a possibility.
The question of whether the artificial brain will ever become smarter, other then faster and more efficient, is highly questionable, since smartness begs semantic questions as to what being 'smart' actually mean. My feeling is that artificial intelligence will outpace the natural brain quantitatively ,whereas, the human brain will become ever more important in qualifying factors relating processing of information.
Sorry, that was supposed to be a “…no offense intended…”. 
I’m not sure what you said, but what I was saying is that it isn’t a matter of interpretation any more. People like Kant had to guess about such things. Science has gone far pass any speculations on the matter other than small sophisticated details. The military has had the brain mapped with extreme accuracy for decades, fully aware of exactly how much EMR or chemicals to use in order to cause exactly which effects. They have hypnosis down to instant perfection. They don’t really need to experiment or hypothesize any longer. It would be about like experimenting to see what air is really made of.
Machines have nothing to do with evolution other than interfering with it. And yes, Man is to be credited for being so stupid as to create a life form so very much more advanced than his own.
Only to people who have no idea of how far past those questions the world really is. It is about like wondering if a machine could ever outrun a horse. When they hadn’t seen it yet, they wondered if there wasn’t some mysterious phenomenon that would prevent it. After they saw machines out run not only horses but everything else, they stopped asking the question. But the question was silly to begin with. And right now it is seriously silly to wonder if AI systems can be more intelligent than humans. They can be as far past human intelligence as how much they can outrun horses.
The human brain has only fading residual use, soon to be none.
James,
You are yourself saying that that initial sensations. That is what i am sugesting.
The first thing that the mind has to do is to sense. Eeverything else is secondary and secondry things cannot be the original language.
Emulation happens when sensing gets complex and will tries to emulate those.
I can agree with the rest.
with love,
sanjay
Sanjay, apparently what you don’t understand is that those “initial sensations” is ALL the brain does throughout, except that they are no longer “initial”. The reverberating of sensations is what causes the actions to be taken. They ARE the “thinking”. And when I say “reverberating”, I am talking about waves of sensation reflecting through the brain in limited ways that form an “algorithm” for thought and the production of symbolic and spoken communication languages. That reverberating is nothing more than emulation of sensations along limited pathways such as to produce triggers toward action. Any kind of other language is a by product of systematically emulating sensations until a “positive” sensation is the result. That last “positive” internally produced sensation triggers the action to be taken. That is ALL that your brain ever does.
In effect, your brain is merely a sensation resonance cavity. If the sensations (“feelings”) resonate “properly”, you behave “properly” (whatever that might be). If for any reason, they do not resonate sufficiently, you misbehave and die out. And that is all there is to it, other than biochemical details.
All right. Apart from significant doubt still, over Your arguments, as per the machines outpacing man, qualification of any system does have a requirement, nevertheless that the system would need to prescribe to fail-safe requirements. The nuclear arsenals of the world illustrate this, by the fact, that since their inception, the nuclear age has not had any malfeasance in terms of an uncontrolled delivery of a nuclear weapon. It is controlled. Control of any system is a sine non quo of it's very use, and artificial intelligence is no exception. I am confident, that the designers of any system , however sophisticated, will develop a con current fail safe system, in accordance to specified safety rules. It is inconceivable, that an artificial intelligence would emerge, able to override these controls. Anti missile systems doomed the nuclear arms race because they short circuited further development, from logistical and financial considerations. Likewise with artificial intelligence. Even if a war of the worlds scenario develop where computers would wage a virtual cyber war, such a race would ultimately fail if for no other reason then un affordability for a defensive/offensive cyber race. It's simply beyond the scope of even the most thorough speculation that such a possibility could even be imagined, since, defensive systems are always congruously and simultaneously developed, as a matter of course.
The history clearly shows that all previous socialisms, because they were modern, were either national or - in the worst case - imperial totalitarianisms. The current globalism is also such an modern imperial totalitarianism, namely the worst case of the worst cases because it is the greatest of history.
The two ways to get out of the imperial madness are the alternatives as city states or as nation states; but because both are about to be destroyed (and even are going to destroy themselves), only one possibility remains: the very small social units, for example something like the "communal particles". But this only possibility will come again anyway, because history repeats its form.
So one could think one has only to wait. But there is another modern problem: the modern trend itself which means also - and amongst other powerful things - MACHINES]! You and other human beings will not be needed anymore. Perhaps no human being will survive because that threat with all its consequences will probably come true.
And if someone has an idea like James with his “SAM” / “communal particle” (see above), then he is threatened with lies, that he were a “friend” of the “bad socialists” of the past (for example: Babeuf, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot), although / because the liars themselves are this bad socialists, even in a global scale of imperialism.
Do what thou wilt. Ye watch thee.
The middle class has to carry everything and everyone. The only difference between former modern times and curent modern times is that the nobility and clergy have been becoming globalists.
[size=77]The middle class carries the globalists.[/size]
Although mind (spirit, consciousness) is more than just a hardcore engineering fact, but the hardcore engineers do not need this “more” in order to do the stuff they want to do.
You and other human beings will not be needed anymore. Perhaps no human being will survive because that threat with all its consequences will probably come true. And b.t.w.: not later than since the beginning of the history of the words „joblessness“ and „unemployment“ it has been being obvious! Johann Wolfgang Goethe knew that already towards the end of the 18th century!
… and what they “want to do” is everything any mind can do, just faster and better.
It is all going in accord with the plan. 
Arminius, just curious, the table describing , those for and those against the op’s proposition has been a while. Would/could a more upgraded version be printed? Or, as it looks, the number of participants have narrowed down a bit. May this be significant/ as far as the holding of pro/con opinions, or may be the narrowing down of opinions to only a few, be of some significance in it’s self?
The number of participants has nothing to do with the opinions. People find other things to be interested in and distracted by. They look for new things, regardless of their opinions of the old things.
To limit the possibility of what a machine can do, is to limit the possibility of what Man can do. Can Man create something greater than himself? He certainly can if there is a possibility of anything greater than himself. As much as Man lusts at the notion that none could ever possibly be greater than he, he will soon discover his error. And by his own hand.
That is precisely what i am suggesting. Brain does nothing except this at the ground level. All other compllexities are derived from it and converted into it also.
I can accept that too.
I think that i have slight disagreement here.
The root question is here what happens first, reverberating of sensations or emulation of those sensations? Those are different things for sure, not one.
Emulation entails the existence of something to emulate. It cannot happen without that.
And, if that is true, it entalis that some mechanism must be already placed there to sense what is to be emulated later.
Thus, it negates the premise that we develop understanding capacity with time. That capacity comes inbuilt.
with love,
sanjay
That is true.
That depends what they want. In some cases, it is not necessary but but not in all.
with love,
sanjay
Not in all senses. He cannot even create something equal to him in some cases but that is possible in some other cases he may exceeds himself.
with love,
sanjay
Those are, in fact, the same thing. The reverberating IS the emulating.
Each time a sensing occurs, a residue is left in the brain that becomes the memory of the event. When the same sense occurs again, that residue is enhanced, the memory is improved. That is what is called “recurrent neural networking”. But there is actually no such thing as a solitary sensing. Every sensation occurs while another is also occurring. The timing between those sensations is what gives you memory of sense associations and timing.
So when a reverberation occurs, by a sense triggering an action of “reflecting”, what we call “pondering” or “thinking about” an issue occurs in the brain. That pondering is the same sense waves reflecting through the brain just as if they had been physically triggered with the exception of being accompanied with a sense of being only a triggered reflection. The real sense is slightly different than the reflected sense, so the mind knows that it is only a thought and not a physical event. The reflected sense wave is “an emulation” of a real sense wave.
With each sensed wave, a degree of that pondering takes place. The degree of that pondering is the degree of thought or consideration the brain/mind is giving to each sensation. It is a measure of “how awake you are to your situation”. The reflecting of the waves is the emulation of the waves, which is the pondering, which is the thinking.
Thus the “language of the mind”, the “language of thought” is emulation of sensing, replaying events in the mind as though they were real.
Verbal language is merely one of the sensing schemes that gets triggered into emulation (that inner voice as one thinks to himself). The verbal cues, although only emulated, trigger additional pondering/emulating that would not have taken place. Inwardly verbalizing thoughts is a means for reducing interference and focusing on a topic, as is writing it down. Machines, not having to deal with the medical interference that humans do, have no need to an inner voice.
Here comes the 5th interim balance sheet:
|Will machines completely replace all human beings?|
||_ Yes (by trend) | No (by trend) | Abstention ___|
||__ Arminius |__ Dan | Obe |
|| James S. Saint | Mr. Reasonable | Kriswest |
||__ Amorphos |__ Fuse | Mithus |
|| Tyler Durdon | Esperanto | Nano-Bug |
||__ Blueshift | Only Humean | Lizbethrose |
||__ Laughing Man |____ Gib | Cassie |
|||Uccisore | Eric The Pipe |
||| Zinnat (Sanjay) |Backspace Losophy|
||| Barbarianhorde | Sweet Misery |
|||__ Ivory Man |__ Ralfy |
||| Moreno | Interterrestrial |
||| Ierellus |__________|
|[size=74]Sum:[/size]|_______ [size=150]6[/size] | [size=150]12[/size] |_ [size=150]11[/size] ________|
Note:
“Yes (by trend)” means a „yes“ as acceptance or agreement of about 80-100%.
" No (by trend)" means a „no“ as acceptance or agreement of about 0-20%.
For comparasion:
1st Interim balance sheet,
2nd Interim balance sheet,
3rd Interim balance sheet.
4th Interim balance sheet.
Thanks, and thanks for the gift, i will listen to it, !