On Wednesday, May 22, 2019 at 9:30:04 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 5/21/2019 11:33 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, May 21, 2019 at 6:51:48 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 5/21/2019 2:57 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> via Hedda Hassel Mørch @heddamorch >> https://twitter.com/heddamorch/status/113048705070737817 >> >> >> A lot to read: >> >> >> *On the axiomatic foundations of the integrated information theory of >> consciousness* >> Tim Bayne [ https://research.monash.edu/en/persons/timothy-bayne ] >> https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2018/1/niy007/5047367 >> >> *Symposium on Bayne, “On the axiomatic foundations of the integrated >> information theory of consciousness”* >> >> http://philosophyofbrains.com/2019/05/20/symposium-on-bayne-on-the-axiomatic-foundations-of-the-integrated-information-theory-of-consciousness.aspx >> >> >> includes >> Hedda Hassel Mørch (commentary): >> >> "[IIT] can also be and is in some ways better interpreted as a form of >> Russellian monism, the view that conscious or protoconscious properties >> constitute the intrinsic nature of physical properties (which physics >> reveals as purely extrinsic and structural), and therefore would not be >> (purely) physical. This could be understood as compatible with IIT’s claim >> that consciousness is identical with integrated information, which could be >> interpreted to say that consciousness is identical with integrated >> information understood, not as a purely physical property, but as a >> property that may include a non-physical intrinsic nature." >> >> >> But read https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1799 >> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scottaaronson.com%2Fblog%2F%3Fp%3D1799&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFkrIgncRPq5YjsNnBBL1uJbVLygQ> >> >> first. >> >> Brent >> > > > > I think Scott (who wrote that in 2014) needs to read this symposium > article. > > He knows something about - and may be considered an expert in - > computational complexity (classical and quantum), but he doesn't know much > more than anyone else outside his specialty, especially - he doesn't know > much about the subject of consciousness. > > > Neither does Tononi. And Scott knows how to calculate integrated > information. > > Brent >
"integrated information" (in the context of consciousness science) is not a well-defined term. That was part of what the underlying paper (on "axioms") and commentary critical of IIT was all about. So why doesn't Scott write an update post from the one he wrote 5 years ago? Because he is not in the field of conscious science - his field is computational complexity, which is pretty useless in contributing anything to the subject. @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/783fa86d-0778-4f81-9336-6356ea3a0e71%40googlegroups.com.
