Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,alt.consciousness
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!news.chalmers.se!news.gu.se!gd-news!d6242
From: sa209@utb.shv.hb.se (Claes Andersson)
Subject: Re: Thought Question
Message-ID: <1995Jan20.154609.28407@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se>
Sender: usenet@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: d6242.shv.hb.se
Organization: Dept. of economy and computer science.
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2.1
References: <3f4k1d$8ae@news.u.washington.edu> <vlsi_libD2Bpxq.C9r@netcom.com> <1995Jan16.012510.29927@Princeton.EDU> <3ff2jb$2ml@crl11.crl.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 22:02:51 GMT
Lines: 35
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.alife:1893 comp.ai.philosophy:24855 comp.ai:26683

dbennett@crl.com (Andrea Chen) wrote:
>yuqun@nordica.princeton.edu (Yuqun (Michael) Chen) writes:
>
>
>
>>I think evolutionism alone cannot explain the development of
>>consciousness. If we view evolution as a force to drive organisms and
>>the environ to a stable state, we human beings probably would never
>>have come into being.
>
>Life to the extent that it has a "drive" is an attempt to fill every
>niche and use every potential source of energy.  It strives to become
>a perpetual motion machine,  the clearest example being a rain
>forest with its canopies to capture all light and every nutrient
>that can be drawn from the soil.
>
>Another need of life is to adapt,  change is guaranteed and the
>capacity for dymamic response is strength.  Simply because individual
>organisms and ecologies often arrive at a state of homeostasis
>does not mean that such balances are the only "drive" of
>evolution.
>
>Consciousness serves pragmatic purposes in allowing a species to
>exploit possible niches and respond to change.  It gives life
>increased internal direction to counter the flux and chaos
>of the environment.

	Well, what you are talking about is correct in every respect
except one where you seem to have missed the point a little.

	The conciosness discussed is more something like the soul.
Of course, consciousness in that respect is to an obvious advantage, but
the qualitative self-awareness. What is that good for?

Claes Andersson. University of Bors. Sweden
