Evolution based on random mutations and natural selection

[philbo]

But the memory itself isn't conscious and doesn't realize or understanding anything, just data storage.

It's a bit more complicated than that..

My daughter's in her final year of her neuroscience degree, about to take her final exams; they've been learning stuff that's right at the cutting edge of current knowledge and ISTM that one of the things she has learned is that it's all a lot more complicated: it's more than just neurons, it's more than just regions of the brain; it's more than just neurtransmitters - all of these tell a part of the story, but even if you were to gain perfect understanding of each part, you'd not be much closer to working out how the brain functions without their interconnections and other unexpected things that keep cropping up.

I think she's wanting to go on and do a PhD, after which I'm sure she'll be even more aware of all the bits we don't know yet.

But no, memory isn't "just data storage", not even close.

 

[FearGod]

It's a bit more complicated than that..

My daughter's in her final year of her neuroscience degree, about to take her final exams; they've been learning stuff that's right at the cutting edge of current knowledge and ISTM that one of the things she has learned is that it's all a lot more complicated: it's more than just neurons, it's more than just regions of the brain; it's more than just neurtransmitters - all of these tell a part of the story, but even if you were to gain perfect understanding of each part, you'd not be much closer to working out how the brain functions without their interconnections and other unexpected things that keep cropping up.

I think she's wanting to go on and do a PhD, after which I'm sure she'll be even more aware of all the bits we don't know yet.

But no, memory isn't "just data storage", not even close.

So what it do other than storing data.

 

[ArtieE]

The driver will have the same personality but the memory which was stored in his brain will be lost.

So you believe in reincarnation then?

 

[philbo]

So what it do other than storing data.

Process it, interpret it - simple example: you see a face that looks familiar, just being "in data storage" is no help at all. The brain can't go through its entire library of patterns looking for the one that matches the face, so the data storage device has to be able to interpret the image the eyes are looking at and pattern-match back to something similar it has in storage. That's a fantastically complicated bit of processing that is a fairly fuzzy match - you never see *exactly* the same face twice.

 

[FearGod]

Process it, interpret it - simple example: you see a face that looks familiar, just being "in data storage" is no help at all. The brain can't go through its entire library of patterns looking for the one that matches the face, so the data storage device has to be able to interpret the image the eyes are looking at and pattern-match back to something similar it has in storage. That's a fantastically complicated bit of processing that is a fairly fuzzy match - you never see *exactly* the same face twice.

Lets imagine a scenario,

2 friends walking together, they saw a guy that they know some time ago but one of them tried to remember his name but he failed.

Now will his memory advise him for alternative solutions or it'll keep on searching for his name, of course he'll ask his friend can you remember what was his name, now if his friend knows and told him yes he was John, his friend will say yes you're right , how i missed that.

Now his friend agreed that he was John and remembered the name as to be correct even though the name was lost in the memory.

 

[FearGod]

So you believe in reincarnation then?

Yes i believe but not similar to the way that Hindus believe, for example God punished some souls by incarnating them as monkeys instead of humans.

 

[philbo]

And your point is?

Our data storage/retrieval is imperfect, by name or by face; it's also imperfect as it is quite possible to "remember" the name as being correct, even if it wasn't. Precise mechanisms of data storage & retrieval are not fully understood.. not much more than partially understood and might not be understandable.

This is a lovely example of what can happen if you've got an evolved solution: On the Origin of Circuits • Damn Interesting

Even on a level of less than 100 logic gates, the evolved solution comes up with something far more compact than we could have designed, but not comprehensible: the chap who designed the experiment assumes that it has something to do with interactions between theoretically unconnected loops, but nobody knows. If something of that simplicity can evolve into a solution that we can't work out why it works, what chance is there for understanding a brain, with millions of times the number of iterations?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I do drive an older car, but that's irrelevant. Computers and technology are a good thing, when utilized properly. Humans should be running computers and technology, not technology and computers running us. How many times do we, ourselves, or see others get frantic over losing our cell phones or something so silly? People have nothing and starve and we take for granted all the things we do have. We are being so conditioned to the point where if things crumbled, we'd be a hot mess over stupid things, and wouldn't be able to think straight.

This is a different issue rather far off from the topic.

 

[FearGod]

And your point is?

Our data storage/retrieval is imperfect, by name or by face; it's also imperfect as it is quite possible to "remember" the name as being correct, even if it wasn't. Precise mechanisms of data storage & retrieval are not fully understood.. not much more than partially understood and might not be understandable.

This is a lovely example of what can happen if you've got an evolved solution: On the Origin of Circuits • Damn Interesting

Even on a level of less than 100 logic gates, the evolved solution comes up with something far more compact than we could have designed, but not comprehensible: the chap who designed the experiment assumes that it has something to do with interactions between theoretically unconnected loops, but nobody knows. If something of that simplicity can evolve into a solution that we can't work out why it works, what chance is there for understanding a brain, with millions of times the number of iterations?

Wasn't the FPGA designed by humans ?
Can that be a achieved without intelligence being involved ?

 

[philbo]

Wasn't the FPGA designed by humans ?
Can that be a achieved without intelligence being involved ?

You're missing the point I'm trying to make: the circuit that evolved in a very simple environment to do a simple task was too complicated to understand how it worked, even for the people who set up the environment & controlled the experiment: there were factors which affected the outcome which were unknown and unpredictable, and it could never have been designed that way.

Scale that up to something of the complexity of the brain, and whatever understanding we have of it, it's always going to be a bit more complicated.

 

[FearGod]

You're missing the point I'm trying to make: the circuit that evolved in a very simple environment to do a simple task was too complicated to understand how it worked, even for the people who set up the environment & controlled the experiment: there were factors which affected the outcome which were unknown and unpredictable, and it could never have been designed that way.

Scale that up to something of the complexity of the brain, and whatever understanding we have of it, it's always going to be a bit more complicated.

No point at all, just ask my question straightforward.
was the experiment done by plan and design ?
Yes or No

 

[philbo]

No point at all, just ask my question straightforward.
was the experiment done by plan and design ?
Yes or No

The only reason for asking that question is to make an argument irrelevant to the point I'm making. Read the article.

 

[FearGod]

The only reason for asking that question is to make an argument irrelevant to the point I'm making. Read the article.

Doesn't your point is that randomness can lead to a designed outcome similar to natural selection and evolution ?

 

[ArtieE]

Yes i believe but not similar to the way that Hindus believe, for example God punished some souls by incarnating them as monkeys instead of humans.

OK I had no idea that muslims believe in reincarnation.

 

[FearGod]

OK I had no idea that muslims believe in reincarnation.

Not similar to the Hindus.

For example the souls of Jinn can be incarnated as cats,snakes..etc and even entering our bodies as bacteria, viruses ..etc

 

[ArtieE]

Not similar to the Hindus.

For example the souls of Jinn can be incarnated as cats,snakes..etc and even entering our bodies as bacteria, viruses ..etc

I see. Such belief is incomprehensible to me. I don't think there's anything somebody somewhere isn't capable of believing. It's like some people lack the ability to say "No I don't believe that. That's too weird even for me to believe."

 

[philbo]

Doesn't your point is that randomness can lead to a designed outcome similar to natural selection and evolution ?

No my point was about evolution of a solution leads to complexity and factors that no designer would even be able to contemplate becoming part of the solutoin.

 

[FearGod]

I see. Such belief is incomprehensible to me. I don't think there's anything somebody somewhere isn't capable of believing. It's like some people lack the ability to say "No I don't believe that. That's too weird even for me to believe."

Atheists used to call the prophet as a crazy man during that era, imagine if you were living at that time and someone told you to be careful of creatures that you can't see by your naked eyes and that you should keep your food covered so they won't pollute your food.

 

[FearGod]

No my point was about evolution of a solution leads to complexity and factors that no designer would even be able to contemplate becoming part of the solutoin.

No magic with the electronic circuits and logic gates, i don't understand how the designers won't be able to contemplate such outcome which can never be achieved without a proper plan and design.

Take for example the designed computerized chess game, if the outcome isn't designed by a smart player as to make random expected movements ahead and what expected movements of the player, then the game will be rubbish and stupid but due to a good plan and design by a smart team of players and programmers then the computer as a player will be as smart as Garry Kasparov.

 

[philbo]

No magic with the electronic circuits and logic gates, i don't understand how the designers won't be able to contemplate such outcome which can never be achieved without a proper plan and design.

This is a trifle annoying. From that post, you have clearly neither read the article, nor what I have written about it. If you had, you would realize that statement is false.