Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Are you saying that the firing patterns created to keep our heart beating can also lead to the creation of another set of firing patterns that enable us to think about having pizza tomorrow for breakfast?
I'm thinking there is some kind of intelligent mechanism in the brain that controls how, when and where those patterns are fired. After all, we are intelligent beings and not robots.
Does this mean machines can do what they were not programmed to do and still be considered as functioning the way they were supposed to function? Would the machine be functioning normal if it only did what it was not programmed to do?
If you watch the documentary from my previous post it will answer many of your questions. Yes I believe machines can have free will. Many life forms do not have free will as they are basically programmed to follow instinct. This does not mean they are not alive. Likewise a machine that has self awareness and sentience will have free will but this is not a prerequisite for it to be designated as a life form.
The Phlogiston theory was not a scientific theory as it could not explain the facts and evidences. Only after Lavoisier recognised phlogiston as an element that was named Oxygen did phlogiston go the way of the dodo. Science was at its infancy back then and the rules governing how scientific endeavour should function were non existent at that time.
The Phlogiston theory was not a scientific theory as it could not explain the facts and evidences. Only after Lavoisier recognised phlogiston as an element that was named Oxygen did phlogiston go the way of the dodo. Science was at its infancy back then and the rules governing how scientific endeavour should function were non existent at that time.
Today science has sets and rules that it abides to in order to function. So the term theory during the days of phlogiston was not the same as it is meant in the scientific world. It was used in the same term as in literature as speculation or something unproven.
Science is an ever evolving thing. It grows as knowledge grows. Just as we humans started of as mere babes hardly able to fend for ourselves and are now adults holding our destiny in our own hands.
You may find the documentary interesting as it shows what life will be like in the near future.
The Phlogiston theory was not a scientific theory as it could not explain the facts and evidences. Only after Lavoisier recognised phlogiston as an element that was named Oxygen did phlogiston go the way of the dodo. Science was at its infancy back then and the rules governing how scientific endeavour should function were non existent at that time.
Today science has sets and rules that it abides to in order to function. So the term theory during the days of phlogiston was not the same as it is meant in the scientific world. It was used in the same term as in literature as speculation or something unproven.
Science is an ever evolving thing. It grows as knowledge grows. Just as we humans started of as mere babes hardly able to fend for ourselves and are now adults holding our destiny in our own hands.
You may find the documentary interesting as it shows what life will be like in the near future.
Thanks, guys!
More or less. The specific case of the heart is a little different, because a heart's beating is regulated primarily inside the heart; the brain only sends signals to alter the beating frequency as and when it needs to.
One firing pattern doesn't. Think of it like a computer: you have all sorts of cascading algorithms and "If A, then B, else C. If B, then D, else E. If C, then F, else G..." loops. The brain probably has something similar, only far more complex. Patterns in patterns criss-crossing and causing new, related patterns. An extension to the leg is followed by a contraction, so the 'extend leg' pattern will end with a 'begin contracting leg' pattern.
There's a difference?I'm thinking there is some kind of intelligent mechanism in the brain that controls how, when and where those patterns are fired. After all, we are intelligent beings and not robots.
Well, *cough*, the original thread was mineMaxwell511, the Contributor, must be proud of his long thread. Although he seldom contributes to it.
(4) got closed, so Maxwell made (5) when he wanted to ask a question.
