From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!darwin.sura.net!ukma!memstvx1!langston Wed Feb  5 11:56:17 EST 1992
Article 3405 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!darwin.sura.net!ukma!memstvx1!langston
>From: langston@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Strong AI and Panpsychism
Message-ID: <1992Feb2.133838.1208@memstvx1.memst.edu>
Date: 2 Feb 92 13:38:38 -0600
References: <1992Jan28.164410.9509@psych.toronto.edu> <21879@life.ai.mit.edu> <1992Feb2.030815.1207@memstvx1.memst.edu> <1992Feb2.170040.6615@news.media.mit.edu>
Organization: Memphis State University
Lines: 67

In article <1992Feb2.170040.6615@news.media.mit.edu>, minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:

>    Memory retrieval is complicated because
> different parts of the brain have so many different functions, but
> surely many retrivals are "GPS" based - that is, retrieved because
> they are stored in systems that are keyed by goals -- or, rather, in
> the Newell-Simon sense of goal, they are triggerred by the detection
> of a certain difference between a goal-target description and a
> description of the current situation.  Surely you can think of lots of
> reasons why things get put into short-term memory.  The difficulty of
> describing consciousness may relate to the apparent fact that we don't
> seem to have good short-term memory records of the machinery that puts
> things into short term memory:-).  I have a couple of guesses about
> why this might be -- and hence why we're not concious of the
> mechanisms that lead to consciousness.  One is that the GPS machinery
> may load the temporary copy from LTM into the same area that made the
> retrieval request.  The other, more philosophical, is that the
> problem-solving act of asking yourself why you thought of X might
> disturb the records, if there are some, of why you thought of X. (This
> reminds me of Gilbert Ryle once arguing that a person might be better at
> explaining why a good friend did X that explaining his own behavior.)


   So.  We are 'passive' witnesses to the information flow required by various
agents in the mind.  STM is the stage on which the information is paraded.  We
can organize and control the agents, and in some cases be 'aware' (gack!) of
them.  This, so far, sound good. With one exception, which I will first argue
against and then for (to save others the trouble :^) )

   What makes this 'consciousness' necessary?  If the agents in our minds seem
to get along quite nicely 'without us' (and I'm sure there are many of these),
why do some deign to let us glimpse what they're up to?  As D. Chalmers pointed
out some time back, it is possible to imagine God creating a universe identical
to ours, except that we do not have consciousness.  What makes this insight
into
our mental processes so important to us?  Why do we need it at all?


   It could be the case that any information brought into STM is 'common'
information; that is, information that can be shared/used by any agents that
need/want it.  In this way, active agents can keep check on the flow of
information and the activity of other agents (they probably have a better
grasp on what is going on than we do), and inactive agents have the chance to
be activated by a certain piece of information.  On the basis of this
information
the 'control structure' (insert favorite euphemism here, except for
homunculus),
can also activate/deactivate individual agents or groups of agents.

  This brings an interesting new light to the concept of attention:
attention (i.e., paying attention, focusing your attention) becomes nothing
more than the witnessing of information flow through/between the agents
necessary for the task you brought your 'attention' to bear on.


   I really like this theory - the more I play with it, the more ideas I'm
getting.  Please let me know if you have any more insights re:this, I'd be
very interested. 
-- 

Mark C. Langston                                  "What concerns me is not the
Psychology Department                              way things are, but rather
Memphis State University                           the way people think things
LANGSTON@MEMSTVX1.MEMST.EDU                        are."     -Epictetus

     "...a brighter tomorrow?!?  How about a better TODAY?"  -me



