|
Right margin |
|
|
How do we recognize "understanding"?
Somebody else's? It depends of course on our own ability to understand.
What do I mean when I say: "I understand"? |
|
|
The ultimate (absolute) semantic
domain: the syntax of reality? Whose reality? |
|
|
Brains recognize (and hence
distinguish) a vast number of objects/processes/actions. Keeping them
apart is equivalent to the very act of naming. The
latter usually happens in social (communication) contexts (words being
socially agreed pointers). Brains reason about
objects/processes/actions based on (absolute) semantics, i.e. on the
syntax of reality as mapped by sense organs onto brain structures and
processes. |
|
|
Nothing is
artificial. As
humans are products of nature, so is the human mind and so are the
products of human minds. Even creating a schism between man and nature
is natural. |
|
|
What is mind? The ability of matter to seek and
to react to signals in non-arbitrary ways. What is
consciousness? The ability of matter to reflect signals internally.
Hence consciousness is a special but non-necessary property of mind,
and there is neither mind nor consciousness without matter. Dualism is
a myth, worse: a fallacy. |
|
|
Free Will(2): If we believed in the existence
of an omniscient and omnipotent entity controlling every move in the
universe then we would have to deny us free will. Would such an entity
have free will? |
|
|
Can digital
computers emulate human minds? (Or: is cognition computation?)
Perhaps. But it is certain that human minds can
emulate digital computers: they can compute and have even built
digital computers whereas digital computers - so far - have not
succeeded in building a single human mind! |
|
|
MIND MATTER MATTERS |