[MD] Computers vs. Brains

[Ham Priday]

Hi Platt --



> The subject is the title of an article appearing in
> the NYTimes on 3/31/09.  Among many interesting
> statements in the article is the following:
>
> "We use emotions, the brain´s steersman, to assign
> value to our experiences and to future possibilities, often
> allowing us to evaluate potential outcomes efficiently and
> rapidly when information is uncertain. In general, we bring
> an extraordinary amount of background information to
> bear on seemingly simple tasks, allowing us to make
> inferences that are difficult for machines."
>
> Assigning values to experience? Sounds familiar doesn't it?
> I wonder if the authors have an inkling of the Pirsigian
> revolution. Probably not because they assume a subject
> (assigning values) to an object (experience) rather than
> seeing experience/values as two sides of the same coin.

They also assume the equation: Brain = Mind, which is the fallacy of 
scientific objectivism.  It takes more than a brain and neural synapses to 
create conscious awareness.  Consciousness is the agent of Value, not an 
electro-mechnical device that can calculate and indicate decisions.  The 
conscious self is what realizes Value in terms of its wants and desires.

I like Jeffry Werbok's follow-up comment to this article:

"Although it is possible to program a computer to emulate activity that 
appears to us as if it 'wants' something, in fact a computer does not, 
cannot want anything.  Only living beings want, and regardless of all the 
technical issues, a machine has no desires, and cannot be made to have any 
desires, a feature of the universe found only in living beings.

"A computer can be programmed to appear to want, to fear, to dream, to hope, 
to aspire, but it is not real.  Matrix fans can argue all they like that we 
are such programmed machines that only imagine that we are self driven 
beings with independent desires, but it isn't real.  Humans dream, imagine, 
conjure, and wish.  These features of life are inherent in the nature of the 
unique energies we are made of."

But thanks for the link, Platt.  It's an interesting and well-written piece, 
for those of the objectivist persuasuion.

Regards,
Ham