Computers Are Incapable Of Creatively Writing Music

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Steve Klinko, Mar 27, 2021.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Quorum Sensing in robotics.
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/448761v1.full
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Word salads can make for wonderful auditory dishes......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    How can any kind of Pattern of Neurons or Pattern of anything produce a Conscious Experience like Redness? There is Zero Logic to this Speculation. It actually is quite Incoherent. It really is a Hope.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,356
    Of course we will have discovered a process. How else do you think A leads to anything else other than through a process??
    We do. A process is still just a process, though. If neural activity leads to consciousness, as scientific understanding goes, then it is because there is a process that leads from the neural activity to consciousness. The "leads from/to" implies a process.
    Yet you seem to be inserting a separate thing such that there are now 2 processes to consider... neural activity to X, and X to consciousness.
    And you have no more evidence or support for your unparsimonious theory than I have gold bars under my floorboards.
    You are now confusing the benefit of conceptually separating the emergent property from that which gives rise to it, with thinking that the emergent property is therefore a separate thing and not arising from that thing. That is muddled thinking on your part, I'm afraid.
    That coupled with nothing but confidence in an alternative, and personal incredulity.
    Details of the experiment. How you are trying to prove it. How it is falsifiable. Etc. Is that too much to ask?
     
  8. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,356
    We don't yet know, and may never know, the most answer to one of the most, if not the most, complex question ever.
    The logic has been explained to you already. Your continued dismissal due to personal incredulity and appeal to ignorance is just trollish behaviour on your part. And no, that's not an insult but reality.
     
  9. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    I cannot post links to my website anymore, by warning from a moderator. You must know my website by now. Just click on Machine Consciousness Experiment links to get your answer. There are two different Experiments.
     
  10. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    I have heard no Logic. All you ever say is that there will be Patterns of Neural Activity that are going to Explain the Experience of Redness. There has to be more than Patterns of Neural Activity. We already know that Patterns of Neural Activity are Correlated with Conscious Experiences. That is not an Explanation, that is merely stating a Correlation. What Scientific Principles are you invoking to Explain how Patterns of Neural Activity produce things like the Experience of Redness, the Standard A Tone, or the Salty Taste?
     
  11. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,324
    Vaguely similar to how ice emerges from a crystalline structure of water molecules. You produce a red patch by orchestrating the applicable, fundamental existential properties into configurations that constitute such a manifestation.

    Oh, but no such elemental precursors are attributed to matter for yielding manifestations. Well, that never stopped philosophers and scientists from appealing to procedural operations as magical conjuring spells.
     
  12. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,324
    Duplicate reply erased here.
     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Because you seem to conflate "experience of redness" with "physical redness". Consciousness and Conscious Experience are emergent properties.

    As far as "redness" is concerned, it is definitely a pattern (frequency)
    What frequency is red?

    The visible spectrum
    https://www.britannica.com/science/color/The-visible-spectrum.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
  14. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Unbelievable that you are still talking about Electromagnetics after all this time. Redness has nothing to do with Electromagnetics. Redness is a Conscious Experience inside the Mind. What is that Redness that is inside the Mind and presented to you in the front of your face when you look at something Red?
     
  15. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Yes, Emergence is very Magical when it comes to understanding Conscious Experience.
     
  16. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    • seen red stuff in the past
    • was told that colour is red
    • the experience formed a chemical / electrical pathway in my brain
    • this resulted in my mind knowing about red
    • the red pathway formed part of my memory
    • next time I saw red
    • same pathway activates
    • I have a red experience

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I believe I clearly stated that redness is a "pattern" , i.e. frequency pattern. I even provided a link to the "visible spectrum".

    Certain areas of the brain are able to read the frequency pattern and translate it into an experience of col0r.

    However, now that you mention electromagnetics, let us have a look at how the brain analyzes data, shall we?

    Are the Brain’s Electromagnetic Fields the Seat of Consciousness?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Some neuroscientists have long considered the brain’s oscillating electromagnetic fields to be interesting but merely “epiphenomenal” features of the brain—like a train whistle on a steam-powered locomotive.
    https://nautil.us/blog/are-the-brains-electromagnetic-fields-the-seat-of-consciousness#

    Any more questions? I'll be happy to do some research for you. After all, I will undoubtedly learn from the experience also.
     
  18. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    When you say "the experience formed a chemical / electrical pathway in my brain" you have no idea what you are talking about. You have no Idea what the Experience of Redness is. So how can something that you completely don't understand do anything in your Brain? We are talking about the Experience here not the Neural Correlates of the Experience. Please try to understand the difference.
     
  19. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    The Brain is not analyzing Frequency Patterns of the Light to determine the Color. All the Frequency Patterns that hit the Retina are funneled into three groups that correspond to the three Color receptors in the Retina. After this the Frequency Identity of the Electromagnetic Phenomena is gone forever. The Brain processes the three channels of Retinal excitation to form the millions of Colors that you can Experience. The point is that the Colors that you Experience are far removed from the Electromagnetic Phenomena. The Colors that you Experience, in a real sense, have nothing to do with the mutitude of external Electromagnetic Frequencies.

    Yes, show me how Electromagnetic Oscillations in the Brain produce the Experience of Redness, the Experience of a Standard A Tone, or the Salty Taste.
     
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Strange that you reject the concept of neural patterns producing conscious experience and then proceed to paint a neural pattern, albeit claiming that it must be removed from and therefore only indirectly is caused by the EM data as received by the retina. OK, we are in agreement on that.
    The secret lies somewhere in incoming data patterns matching data patterns stored in memory. (Anil Seth)
    OK, this will take me some time to research what is known about this. I have never claimed that I have the answer, only the location and my personal view excluding some magical sauce from an external intelligence.
    And I will not get into in-depth mathematics of Chemical or EM patterns and functions. This will be my best guess based on hard facts, not a solution to the hard problem. This the direction of research Tegmark proposes.

    Lets start with what we do know. We know we are conscious, we know consciousness happens in the brain, we know that we have all the required properties for being conscious , we know that we can process a range of data from external natural phenomena, via our senses.
    I call that a very good start. A fact that has been recognized by many scientists.

    Personally I see only one main candidate that must be critically involved in the data processing and the eventual experiential results, by its very abundance and roles it plays in information distribution, the microtubule. It has to be a major contributor to sensory awareness and data proccessing.

    In the mean time I recommend you research the three current main (related) concepts. ORCH OR, IIT, Consciousness Access Hypothesis.
    You may want to peruse some of the 97 pages I have devoted on the "hard fact" of MT. It can be found in Pseudoscience sub-forum.
     
  21. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Of course we are now way off topic!

    Let's return to the question if computers can be creative without being conscious.
     
  22. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,324
    Before scientific investigation arguably appropriated them, that was the original context for color names and adjectives, anyway: Perceptual experiences transpiring in the brain's depiction of an external world, as opposed to the naive realist's belief that he/she was directly in non-mediated contact with mental-independent objects literally possessing those qualitative properties.
     
  23. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,356
    I'm not asking you to post links, I'm asking you to explain the experiment you think proves this "Conscious Space" you hypothesise to exist. Set it out for us. Explain what you use, how it works, how it supposedly proves what you think it does etc. Can you do that, or not? If not, then stop wasting our time. If you can, then I look forward to examining what it is you put forward. But I am not going to trawl through your website. You need to explain it here.
    Then I must assume you have a selective (i.e. trollish) inability to read responses in this thread (e.g. post 42). Seriously, reread this thread and you will see some of the "logic" that you have asked for. Dismissing what has been posted by continued "I have heard no logic" does nothing but build weight of evidence of your trollish behaviour.
    Logic doesn't need to invoke scientific principles to be valid logic. It simply needs for the conclusion to follow from the premises. You can dispute the premises, of course, that is your prerogrative. Logic doesn't provide mechanisms, or reasons, or even truth (the conclusion of valid logic can be false if one or more of the premises are false).
    e.g.
    All elephants are balloons.
    Nelly is an elephant.
    Therefore Nelly is a balloon.
    This is a valid syllogism, but where is there any mechanism? The conclusion follows the premises, but there is no explanation, no mechanism, no proof beyond the validity of the logic.
    I suggest you therefore stop asking for logic when (a) you've been provided with some, and (b) it won't anyway give you what you seek.
     

Share This Page