Are hu mans, people from earth, just organic computers?
Printable View
Are hu mans, people from earth, just organic computers?
Not all. Some aren't even typewriters.
what separates us from a computer?
emotions? what are emotions for? chemical reactions to reinforce behaviour, reproduction, social interactions, society, continuation of genes...
The capacity to continue to work after you crash.
Not the way I drive :afrog:Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew G
does it all come down to logical decisions? if so then we must just be organic computers?
so it is all logical or not? what is the structure for non logic?
some decisions are made by the hormonal activity, which seems to be the perfect random function.
well, actually, a female in her natural cycle creates the most random outputs, but lets make that an exception... :p
The brain, in theory, could be classified as a computer... however, we have much more than pure logic that helps us with decisions. Emotions are anything but logical.. even their very nature is illogical. Think about it. They have very little productive purpose except completion of a desired task. Other than that, they serve very little in advancing. You could also say they are the reason that we have come this far along as a species. Emotion drives everything in humanity. If emotions are illogical, while a computer is pure logic unless it's hard coded with exceptions, then what do you call a computer driven by illogic?
The reason why the brain is not a computer is because we didn't design it. Computers are a class of artificial objects, their purpose being computation; humans are not artificial objects.
what is a hu man's task if not computation?
emotions are logical constructs necessary on a subconscious level to preserve life and continue the propogation of genes as in flight or fight response from the cortisol and limbic systems in the brain, love via a constant release of dopamine and serotonin for the creation of monogamy which is essential if it takes a long time for a child to be reared, and we get chemical rewards and penalties for social interactions which enables among other things sharing of information between organic lifeforms.
in the same way that on a subconscious level the heart beats by itself and the body regulates its own temperature. just because they happen subconsciously doesn't make them illogical, there is a purpose for all of these things. also it would be easy to program a computer to respond to situations with a subroutine called emotions which is branched depending on the situation.
evolution is necessary to a point then no longer required, a concept necessary to get to true life, then absolete once achieved.
Define your concept of this "true life" that all of us are evolving towards.
well that's not necessary, it is obvious. then it is a question of intelligent design. evolution is a precursor to intelligent design. evolution is a limited concept, intelligent design is not, which is why intelligent design is taught as a science.
Where is it taught in schools? Kansas?Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
well you could always expand the concept of evolution to include the key components of intelligent design, and make it an unlimited concept too. the differing labels are useful to allow people to make the distinction to allow for understanding to be reached, then once reached the distinction is irrelevant.
Says who ?Quote:
Originally Posted by kedaman
Depends how you define artificial... if artificial means build by someone/something then I think we ARE artificial, because I fail to believe that something like us (humans, animals and plants) are made by mistake. I think we were made by something.
Where is it taught in schools?Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
you mean intelligent design?Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=in...&start=10&sa=N
where does the energy for a photon particle come from?
Happy now?Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
I call bullsheit. It is not easy to program a computer to respond to situations with a subroutine called emotions. The key is the environment and satisfactory results. Those would have to be seperate applications.Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
Sure, you can program a machine to react to predefined input, but what happens when that machine has to react to undefined input, in a partially defined environment, and to top it off additional input as to what is a satisfactory result.?
That leaves you with 3 seperate applications to develop. 1 application, we'll call "The universe 1.0" and another we'll call "Death Birth 1.0",
The universe would have to provide all of the input that "Human Brain 1.0" is capable of receiving and interacting with. Universe would also have to react to the output of Human Brain 1.0. See the problem? Two different interfaces that are self generating themselvs and your chances of ever getting two systems to simultaneously generate interfaces that can communicate with each other are " 1 to a number Greater than the number of particles in the universe".
If somehow you get past that problem, the next problem is defining if human brain is preforming well enough to be given a second opportunity to continue programming it's self after death and rebirth. If you combined all of the processing powers of all the computers in existance right now, In 5 miillion or so years, you might get a version of "Human Brain" to utter the words "Hello World". or it might just evolve itself into something that flashes 42 over and over.
a hu man has no clue either, so hu mans allow other organic computers to program it for them, hence the process of teaching. then some of us learn to teach ourselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
thanks martin:DQuote:
Originally Posted by MartinLiss
computers are very good at logic, so if given a set of instructions, it would be very easy for it to identify a logical inconsistency and then learn through deduction.
It requires the ability to see beyond logic to do this.
Give a program an undefined variable, and it'll crash. Just... stop. Give a human an undefined variable, and (s)he'll react. There's a big difference. And since everybody reacts differently, you can't say reprogramming is involved.
so if you allow a computer to be told what to do, it learns, then if you allow it to run a logical subroutine over the top of its new learning, then it will question and refine and learn.
Human attributes. A computer is program-driven. It does what it's been programmed to do. There is no giving a computer a choice of what to do. In the end, it will always come down to programming. Tell a human that they're programmed to do a certain task. A brain can be developed such that it learns a general subject better, but that doesn't mean it's programmed to do something.
so essentially a human body supports a relatively low grade logical decision making and learning system called a mind.
I never said low grade. I believe it's a considerably higher grade on the fact that it can make a decision NOT based on logic or predefined variables.
sure there is: if then else ifQuote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
isn't that what we call a profession?Quote:
Tell a human that they're programmed to do a certain task.
trueQuote:
A brain can be developed such that it learns a general subject better, but that doesn't mean it's programmed to do something.
can you provide an example of this sort of higher calibre decision making?Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
If [condition]Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
Else [condition]
That's not a choice, that's a determination. Given x, do I do a or b? The choice is dependant upon nothing except the value of x.
How many people wind up on professions that they don't excel in?Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
Why does someone choose to steal a car, knowing they'll get caught? I'm pretty sure a computer would see that and not do it at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
when young hu mans have very few if then else statements, then as time progresses the number of else statments increases giving a greater variety of options.Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
sure however the concept is that an organic computer is taught to perform a logical set of operations called a profession.Quote:
How many people wind up on professions that they don't excel in?
and that is a higher calibre decision because?Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
What strand of logic can be blamed for deciding to break the law with the full knowledge that you WILL get caught?
your argument was that a hu man had a better decision making system than a computer because it was illogical.Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
anyway, to answer your question, there is never 100% probability of getting caught by extension the perpetrator must then assess the probability of the risk reward ratio.
My arguement had nothing to do with which system was "better", merely that a humans is "higher" as it doesn't base itself on logic.
A car thief is almost always caught. And in the event that he isn't, he has to spend his life dodging authority because if he gets arrested for ANYTHING after that, he will get sent to jail. The risk-reward ratio is strongly against the decision to steal the car.
And yes, that's a logical deduction, merely because my brain works more like a computer than most people. I think very logically by nature.
It's not if...then... else statements that accrue. It's a data store which is used in a decision making process.Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
"In the movies, if someone steals a car, they end up in a car chase."
"My friend Tim stole a car, but he's in jail now."
"This is a rather empty neighborhood."
Despite the first two pieces of data, the guy may choose to steal the car anyways due to the third. Or he may not. Or he may eat ice cream. Here, he uses judgment, not if-then-else statements.
Also, you haven't really answered my previous question. You've given me a link to a google search page which actually goes against your statement. If you want to retract your statement, then please do so.
ok so he makes decisions, however, what is the basis for the decision that he makes?Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
wasn't there lots of references regarding intelligent design and when where and why they are taught in educational establishments?Quote:
Also, you haven't really answered my previous question. You've given me a link to a google search page which actually goes against your statement. If you want to retract your statement, then please do so.
I believe your first question was answered as "judgement".
What is the difference between a hu man and a human ?
One has empty space between the ears.
Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
No, A human does have a clue. We have evolved into a system that has an interface capable of interacting with the universe. Otherwise known at the 5 senses. And have a pretty defined set of satisfactory results like if you don't eat you die. So how long would it take you to write a program that teaches a computer how to mine coal, build a power plant, generate electricity from coal, design and build a power grid to get electricity from said power plant to itself and plug itself in?
It's not a matter of teaching the computer, it's a matter of writing the program such that it doesn't need to be taught. Ingenuity. It's what drives advancement. You can't teach a computer to just come up with a good idea and work at it. The ultimate learning computer would have no code at all and have to write it itself... and as we all know, a computer must have a program to do anything. Except crash.
At least you got my point. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
All I could figure out from your posts was that the universe is like an abstract class and our senses are like an interface. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
Sort of, if you want to put it in oop terms! The problem is when developing software you have a compiler that tells you if your class is implementing the correct interface. That does not exist in the case the original poster presented. That means that one application will have to randomly generate interfaces and the other would have to randomly spit out ojects until by chance it makes one that conforms to an interface. This would have to happen X ? ammount of times before your app could even begin to attempt to be self aware. That would take.... well You'd have a better chance of winning the mega millions lottery every week for the next few billion years. IMHO
ok we covered emotions, learning, evolution and intelligent design and I don't want to go around in triangles about it. so what about the concept of a soul, can a computer have a soul?
that really depends on how you define the word "soul"
before we could worry the possibility of a computer having a soul, you would have to first determine if humans infact have a soul.
The soul is often related to religion and the thing that is inside us that can not die and is seperate from our physical bodies.
Many people that believe in the existance of a soul, also think that humans are the only living creatues to have one, which of course opens up a whole other avenue for debate.
Most people that do believe in the soul, do agree that it does require life (aka carbon based life, the only life we actually know of at this point)
Quote:
Originally Posted by learning c
Yes that's easy. I play James Brown mp3s on mine all the time.
Yeah sure why not. just make a backup of everything stored on it. That pretty much covers the bases of the religous definitions of "Soul"
ok kleinma, good information :thumb:
so a soul has:
1. is not bound to the body
2. has religious connotations
3. is not possessed by animals
1. well many people have argued that a mind is not part of the body, and therefore could be the soul.
a computer therefore could have a soul
2. the religious connotation is being owned by another party usually called the devil, bezzlebub, lucifer, but by extension anyone who wants to posses the soul of another. so logically anyone who is owned by another does not have a soul.
at the moment computers have not been written to allow for independence and are therefore at the moment all owned and therefore do not have a soul. however, as previously explained they could be changed to have a soul from a conceptual perspective.
3. wild animals are arguably not owned by anyone and therefore do have a soul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by litlewiki
The difference is,
a "hu man" is someone a ferengi has decided to talk to,
while a human is someone wondering why he's standing around listening to a ferengi calling him a "hu man".
:wave:
what's a feren gi?
Ok, you can end the Trek jokes now...
Seriously, though, I can't believe I missed that one...
does the owner of a soul own their own soul?
Of all the Chit Chat threads I've ever seen this has to be one of the most inane.
can an owner of a soul talk to another owner of a soul?
can someone who owns their own soul talk to another person who also owns their own soul?
Are you talking to us?
Here are some things to ponder.
Why is red?
Who is moon?
Where is is?
What is the purpose of this thread?