From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wupost!emory!ogicse!qiclab!nosun!hilbert!max Mon Nov  9 09:36:50 EST 1992
Article 7520 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wupost!emory!ogicse!qiclab!nosun!hilbert!max
>From: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Simulated Brain
Message-ID: <1992Nov6.001731.536@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com>
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:17:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: hilbert.1992Nov6.001731.536
References: <749@ckgp.UUCP>
Organization: Cypress Semiconductor Northwest, Beaverton Oregon
Lines: 49

In article <749@ckgp.UUCP> thomas@ckgp.UUCP (Mike Thomas) writes:
>
>Hi,
>
>In Article 7679 Thomas Lund writes:
>> An excellent suggestion for a discussion topic.  Granted, there is
>> no way of knowing what has happened to the "mind"; whether it has turned into
>> a hurricane or two is unobservable.  However, there are some behaviors that
>> split brained patients exhibit that need to be considered by AI theorists.
>
>... But the point I wanted to
>make was this. The patient admitts to being able to control both hands.

All sorts of brain damage can be invisible to
the subject; in fact, stimilate a motor region in a patient, causing
the arm to raise, and she will make up some supposed reason for initiating
the motion. And, in fact, these patients don't _report_ their minds as
being split - it takes subtle experiments to detect it.

>The problem was that one mind/hemishpere desided to do something, then the
>focus/"I" would jump to the other side not knowing what it wanted to do but
>responds to the domain/environment/stimuli of the book... hence turning the
>page the incorrect number of times... the the "I"/Focus jumps back and the
>mind gets frustrated because the other hemishpere did not respond correctly.

You want to believe in the "I"/Focus, so you imagine it 'jumping'. I don't
see that you have presented one good reason for believing in it.  You
have here admitted that the mind is split by the operation (with caveats).
So thoughts, intents, apparently are not carried by your jumping boojum.
Your boojum doesn't contain or imply a unified field of experience - so
it appears useful neither to scientists (making no predictions) nor to
dualists (in no way encapsulating awareness in a mind pearl).

>The important part is this, that you need both the mind and the focus/"I" to
>get the mind to control the body/brain, and that when useing language or
>symbols that will need to be used, the focus/"I" does not take the symbols
>with it, the symbols are created in the mind that handles symbols (left
>hemishpere, right hand) but the function hand in this exmple (the left hand,
>right hemishpere) does not have the numbers to control the count of pages to 
>turn. Remember that the act of jumping is not noticable since your perception
>is the same in the two domains/minds (looking out at a book). 

Close one eye. Now open it and close the other.
See the parallax shift? Think you would miss that happening over and over?
I don't think so. The point is that awareness has been split, and what
is on one side of the divide is prevented from crossing over. Period.

>  Thank you, 
>  Michael Thomas 


