|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Nature's innate intelligence. Does it exist? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
zi ko writes:
So... it would be fair to use exaples of the type: If an animal can see, feel hot , danger ect, why not a cell If an animal can think: why can't cells think?If an animal can make noises: why can't cells make noises? If an animal can hear: why can't cells hear? If an animal can taste: why can't cells taste? If an animal can lay eggs: why can't cells lay eggs? If an animal can weave baskets: why can't cells weave baskets? If an animal can build a rocket to the moon: why can't cells build a rocket to the moon! Wow: cells can do almost anything! /sarcasm off If an animal can run at 30mph: why can't you?If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
zi ko writes:
But cells can also "hear", "weave", "think", etc. I advise you to read my O.P. You will see there that cells can "see" "measure" ect So, one question at a time then: Hearing: I don’t give it the original meaning of the word (namely, to the ability to perceive sound by detecting vibrations through an organ such as the ear. What I really mean is: in response to auditory factors, a naturally inside organism pre-existing mechanism, and by force of chemistry and physics, causes changes in the genome. So I think of it as a mechanism, but not hearing in any traditional sense. If an animal can hear: why can't cells hear?If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
zi ko writes:
I was not quoting you. I put it in the order the eminent scientist have written it. Don't change please what i have said. Here it is again: Hearing: I don’t give it the original meaning of the word (namely, the ability to perceive sound by detecting vibrations through an organ such as the ear. What I really mean is: in response to auditory factors, a naturally inside organism pre-existing mechanism, and by force of chemistry and physics, causes changes in the genome. So I think of it as a mechanism, but not hearing in any traditional sense. If an animal can hear: why can't cells hear? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
The only place that cellular intelligence is mentioned is in the title/heading. Here is a site that talks about it but I suppose it isn't conclusive. He actually seems to be writing about cellular memory (which I saw best described as "It has not been easy to find any article that either does not condemn the idea as total mumbo jumbo, or, while supporting the ideas, still makes it sound like it is mumbo jumbo.").But memory is not intelligence - my PC has memory. If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
As in 'military intelligence'? I'm not trying to be clever here, but isn't memory stored intelligence? Then yes, memory could be considered to be stored intelligence. But the document you linked refers to DNA from one human affecting the preferences of another human. (His use of the word 'memory' is kind of metaphorical.) And the intelligence that Jar was asking about was not (if I understood correctly) intelligence as in news/information.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
The plant's movement is just a result of chemical reactions. For example a leaf turning to the sun. It seems to me that stored intelligence such as that would be considered innate intelligence. When you move your hand near a fire, your cells do not think "I'd better tell the brain it is warm!": instead the damaged cells react chemically to the heat which, in turn, sends an electro-chemical signal to the brain.Their behaviour is as regular and predictable as the motion of a newton's cradle - no intelligence required. The only thing that controls the chemical reactions are chemical laws/laws of physics.Once certain conditions are met, the cells have no choice but to react in specific ways. If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
The behaviour of chemicals inside the plant's cells are dependent on the laws of physics. They cannot behave in any other way. I agree that it isn't active intelliegence but it seems to me that a plant or my hand requires stored information or intelligence to reactA plant has a particular combination of chemicals+cells which when subjected to sunlight will rotate the plant to face the light. If they have that particular combination of cells then they have no choice but to turn to the light - in the same way that ice has no choice but to melt when heated. GDR writes:
This is because the chemical reactions have finished. A dead leaf doesn't turn towards the sun as the information has been lost. Think of it like paper: you can't burn paper twice. The fire changes the paper chemically and it cannot be re-burnt. A dead leaf is similar - it has changed chemically and can no longer turn to the light. GDR writes:
But it is just a chemical reaction. It seems to me that the chemical reaction and the electro-chemical signal that you mentioned required stored information in the living cells of the plant to behave the way they do.If you stretch an elastic band and then release it, it will return to its original length. Do you think that is because of stored information? Or is it just the unavoidable behaviour of rubber due to its chemical composition? GDR writes:
I only need 4-5 hours of sleep. By the way, you're up late.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
zi ko writes:
Since you seem reluctant or unable to explain or support your statement, I will simply assume the opposite position: Oversimplification and inappropriate using of analogues.No, it is not an oversimplification and inappropriate using of analogues. If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
I am a long way from being an expert. Frankly even after googling around I don't understand the subject anywhere near well enough to debate you so if you don't mind I'll just ask another question. I think I might simply have a couple more years of googling than you. GDR writes:
Different cells change at different speeds. My understanding is that the human body changes every cell in that body at least once every 7 years. (Which begs the question who is the real me. )From what I have read, cerebral cortex neurons are the only cells never replaced - so they would seem a prime candidate for being the real you. GDR writes:
As pointed out by Wounded King (above), information and intelligence are not the same. This being the case then I assume that replacement cells require information gathered from outgoing cells to perform their required function in the body. Wouldn't that constitute information or stored intelligence? Books contain information, but we would never consider them intelligent. Cells can be created by a parent cell dividing into 2 daughter cells (these are duplicates of the parent cell) or by a stem cell dividing into 2 daughter cells (which are not identical to the stem cell).The parent cell uses itself as a template for creating its 2 daughter cells. I bow to WK's more learned description of where the stem cell gets it template from. To expand a bit on 'information', it is very easy to confuse what we consider to be information and actually knowing something.The soil in my garden is quite acidic. This is information. But the plants don't know it is acidic. They don't know if they can or can't grow there. A seed lands on my garden and either successfully grows or dies. The plant doesn't know the information that the soil is acidic - it just reacts chemically to the acid in the soil. There is no intelligence telling the plant to die - it is just a simple chemical reaction. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Straggler writes:
In my honest (but uneducated) opinion: No - the brain cells are no different. They are affected by external inputs, but ultimately they will always respond in exactly the same way to the exact same stimuli. Are brain cells any different to what you have described above? Don't they obey the laws of physics? Can they behave in any other way?If I was to kick you, your response is already established in your brain. (I realised while writing my previous posts that there was a thin line between the bio-chemical machine that is a plant and the bio-chemical machine that is a human. The main difference I saw was the brain's cognitive abilities.)
Straggler writes:
Not being restricted by those things is not the criteria for intelligence. If NOT being restricted by these things is the criteria for "intelligence" then can we really say that our brains, and thus we, are "intelligent"....? Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Straggler writes: Fair enough.So what is? quote:None of those seem to describe a plant turning to the sun. Straggler writes:
Zi ko's definition of 'intelligence' seems to be 'unknown and unevidenced mechanism'.
If human brains result in "intelligence" but individual cells don't what is it that we mean by "intelligence" in this context? Straggler writes: Yes - sometimes I get complacent and need a kick. Just trying to prompt those who oppose him to think about what it is they actually mean..... Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
My answer to this relates to the discussion Straggler and Jar are having about determinism. A plant will always do the same thing. However, we are different. Without somebody telling us otherwise we would feel that it is fine to go out in the sun for long periods and would likely do so - once. Then we learn that even though our external inputs tell us it is good, it is actually bad for us. For us to learn not to do it again we not only need the memory of the first time but have to intelligently make a decision to get out of the sun to avoid sunburn.I see the brain as a learning computer. You have your initial programming (nature) and the additional programming from external stimuli (nurture). And, like a computer, when given a specific input you will give a specific output. But I am finding it difficult to think of a perfect example, because the act of testing someone's response to an input will change their programming and therefore their next response may not be the same. But to generalise: people always act in accordance with their nature (or programming). GDR writes:
All the definitions of intelligence require many cells. Where is that intelligence if it isn't in our cells? It is a good example of something being greater than the sum of its parts. The brain is not simply 1000's of unconnected cells - and neurons are unique in how they react to each other. But I don't think that determinism and intelligence are mutually exclusive.
GDR by PM writes:
You have almost answered your own question. My question then would be if intelligence is from a combination of many cells, but there is no intelligence within an individual cell, then where is that intelligence emerging from? Intelligence is an 'Emergent Property'.
http://www.stewdean.com/alife/emergence.html (This link actually mentions the brain.) http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=2008091406183... It is the same as a 'Y' shaped piece of wood and an elastic band are not - individually - weapons.But combine them and you have a hand-held catapult. If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
Our moods are caused by chemicals in our bodies. Our moods which affect our decisions seem to change for no discernable reason, and that definitely affects our decisions. I agree that we can always make the argument that any decision that we make is the result of something that we were born with or were influenced by, but that just doesn't seem consistent with my life experience. JMHOThey are another form of input to the brain. They are many many factors that could affect our decisions, but the complexity of the inputs does not negate determinism. GDR writes:
I was going to mention that in a previous post, but I decided it would just cloud the issue, as my knowledge of QM could be written on the back of a stamp with a crayon. But, I guess that QM could prove me wrong.
With my minimal understanding of QM I think it is clear that we don't live in a deterministic world. However, I suppose you can say they aren't mutually exclusive but it seems to me that determinism would make intelligence unnecessary, and if that is true then why would intelligence have evolved in the first place. GDR writes:
I don't really understand this question. OK. But the sling shot combines the existing components of the wood and elastic band. What particular qualities do cells have that when combined form intelligence, and for that matter consciousness, as emergent properties? Maybe if you could answer this question for me, I would see what kind of answer you want: What particular qualities does the wood and the elastic band have that when combined form a weapon? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
Yes, I agree with the almost infinite amount of 'inputs'. but the complexity does make determinism less likely. My mood can be affected by the moods of another person or persons, whose mood is affected by other person or persons ad infinitum. In addition it is then affected by weather, how much sleep I got, the comment someone made to me yesterday, my health etc. All these are in addition to your point about chemicals in the body.But Determinism is completely unaffected by either simplicity or complexity. It is neither more nor less likely in a complex system. One form of Determinism is Necessitarianism: quote:It is worth reading Wiki: Determinism as it goes into a lot more detail than I can. GDR writes:
Natural Selection favours apes with brains. ...I also want to repeat the point that determinism makes intelligence unnecessary and thus there would be no reason for it to evolve.Our brains evolved because mutations occurred to our ape ancestors. The mutations occurred because of ambient radiation. Ambient radiation existed because of how the earth was formed. etc... There is no 'necessity' involved.
GDR writes:
Neurons can make and break connections to other neurons creating different electro-chemical pathways through our brains. This results in giving us abilities that we class as 'intelligence' (e.g. problem solving, reasoning, learning, etc.). The wood provides a base on which to anchor the potential energy of the elastic. In order for cells to be the basis for emerging intelligence they have to have properties that allow for that to happen. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
GDR writes:
To quote Wiki: (Emphasis mine) If the results are random then I think that's a pretty strong indicator that consciousnes of whatever kind, dictates the outcome.quote:If quantum indeterminacy affected larger events then wouldn't everything be random? Objects would appear and disappear; pens would fall up or down; nothing could be anticipated. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024