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.
How do you know that dolphins can not contemplate the existence of a god or the supernatural. Do dolphins think we are non-sentient because they can not tell us about their gods?
Do dolphins believe in a rain god? A sun god? Do they believe that natural phenomena have supernatural causes? How can we know this?
I have always preferred "replication and organized metabolism" as the definition of life. This would exclude fire and viruses while including everything in the commonly held taxonomic trees.
Humans are animals. There is no credible distinction such as that which you suggest.
Computers, as they work today, are not going to be aware of what they are thinking because they don't think. They follow instructions. A computer is a vast series of switches which are "flipped" on the basis of the settings of other switches. Think of them as being very much 2-dimentional. Actual thought appears to require something mimicking a neural network where some components are capable of monitoring and analyzing the states of other components within the network as the processes of the network progress. Think of a neural network as being more 3-dimensional.
Human brains are animal brains and function in precisely the same manner. The difference between a human brain and the brain of a chimpanzee is primarily the number of repetitions occurring during the development of the brain. As an organism developes, there are genes which determine the number of times the first neural cell will replicate, and the number of times each resulting neural cell will replicate. Thusly, this follows a standard binary sequence of growth, (i.e. 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 32 - 64 - 128 - 256 - 512 - 1024 - 2048...). The difference between the chimp brain and human brain is indicative of two extra replication sequences in the human.
All animal brains are made up of neurons. And at any reasonable level of analysis, a neuron is a neuron is a neuron. You can't isolate the way a human neuron functions from that of a chimpanzee or a sea slug, for that matter. The difference is in the number of neurons, not the functioning of those neurons. The key is in the genes passed to each species from its parent(s). Take a single neuron and set a gene to cause that neuron to undergo a dozen rounds of cell division and you have enough neurons to run a sea slug. Change that single gene so that the neurons undergo 25-rounds of cell division and you have enough neurons to make a human brain. Stop 2-3 rounds short of that and you have a chimp brain.Sea Slug - Neurons 2^12
Chimpanzee - Neurons 2^23
Human - Neurons 2^25
(NOTE: While the reference to the genetic function which determine the number of neurons is accurate and the article from which the information came does claim 2^25 as an accurate representation, most sources indicate human brains contain closer to 100 billion neurons, (approx. 2^37), which seems more accurate. The point here to focus upon then, is that all one must do is alter the gene which determines the degree of replication for the first neural cell to create the difference between a human brain and that of another animal.)
Your division of human and animal brains simply doesn't exist. We are animals.
(Source: Discover Magazine, April 2006)
Though you're obviously not aware of this, dolphins have a very complex communication system which must be recorded and slowed down before feeble human hearing can even sort out the data. And while many animals have been taught forms of human communication, humans seem significantly inferior at mimicking the languages of other animals. Gorillas and parrots have been taught human languages, (not just replication of the sounds but actual communication skills as well as demonstrating the ability to combine known words to represent objects for which they have been taught no specific words). The closest humans seem to have come is to decypher the dance bees perform to indicate the direction and distance to sources of pollen.If dolphins had intelegence of people they would develope communication to the point that if we didn't communicate with them they would communicate with us.
As this is not the case I have assigned the fact that many wish the animals to be aware to the watching of to many Desney movies.
This brings us to an interesting point.
The intelegence of animals must have been measured scientifically.
So the maximum intellegence of an animal is which animal and has the equivelent intelegence of what age of a human.
Duane
This causes me to wonder if you've ever even been around any animals. Animals most certainly can make choices. To suggest otherwise simply cannot be supported. A dog may want a treat resting on a counter and might rise to try to retrieve the desired food item. Upon being admonished by a person, an animal might sometimes give up his quest to obtain the food item and other times will snatch it quickly before dropping back to all fours. In each instance, the animal has made a choice to either seek what it desires, (the food item), or seek to satisfy the communicated desires of a member of its pack, (which is what we become when we keep dogs as pets).We are not all animals because we have the ability to choose.
You can state this as often as you wish but it will do nothing to change some facts you may not be terribly comfortable with.Understanding the process which allows this does not suddenly change that we are different from animals.
There is no known reason why thinking, (either that of humans or that of other animals), can't be replicated at a mechanical or bio-mechanical level.You description does however suggest that the thinking process can be duplicated which is my reason for starting the discussion.
Perhaps you lack the necessary understanding of the difference between the working of an electrical circuit and that of an animal brain such as that of a human. I tried to explain some of the basics, but not only was the explanation extremely simplified for the purposes of the forum, it was likely still too complex for anyone who can't allow themselves to come to grips with the fact that human brains are animal brains. The only difference is the number of neurons.I have searched for a scientific attempt at this with a computer program with no success.
It is currently still beyond the ability of man to replicate a truly "thinking" machine. Current research suggests that the first successes may come from merging biological components with electrical and mechanical components.Is this still beyond technical ability or is there more to it then the process you described?
Certainly not. A the complexity of a chimpanzee brain is so decidedly above the current aspirations of neural network research that no such attempt has even been made. Were we able to replicate the functioning of a chimpanzee brain in a synthetic neural network, a functioning synthetic human brain would be only a few years behind. The technology would be precisely the same. Assuming something akin to Moore's Law were applicable, it would take approximate 6-years to progress from a synthetic equivalent of a chimpanzee brain to that of a human. All that would be necessary is to increase the number of nodes in the network.Has this been accomplished in an animal ( have we made a smart chimp?)
Well if I found out your cat had an opinion about God's existence I would have to say he/she was sentient.
But you cant be sentient for your cat.
If the cat or the computer was trying to find out if I was sentient then its ability to think would be verified.
Duane
So you are saying that a dolphin realizes it is thinking?
Then why can I not form a language with the dolphin which we can use to discuss Gods existance.
Duane
If dolphins had intelegence of people they would develope communication to the point that if we didn't communicate with them they would communicate with us.
Gottservant said:As this is not the case I have assigned the fact that many wish the animals to be aware to the watching of to many Desney movies.
Gottservant said:This brings us to an interesting point.
The intelegence of animals must have been measured scientifically.
So the maximum intellegence of an animal is which animal and has the equivelent intelegence of what age of a human.
You seem to have reached the point where you believe that self awareness and sentinence is purely based on questioning ones own existance in the context of the suprnatural (i.e, the existence of gods). In which case, I respectfully bow out of the discussion and say only that I doubt if computers which only work on the basis of "0" and "1" will ever reach a point of self awareness.
Your definition of "life" is far too narrow, and in any event, I doubt that computers will ever reach even a primative form of "life"
Norm
Let me ask you this; why do you think human brains and the brains of non-human animals are substantially different in their abilities? From where does such a notion arise?
Though you're obviously not aware of this, dolphins have a very complex communication system which must be recorded and slowed down before feeble human hearing can even sort out the data. And while many animals have been taught forms of human communication, humans seem significantly inferior at mimicking the languages of other animals. Gorillas and parrots have been taught human languages, (not just replication of the sounds but actual communication skills as well as demonstrating the ability to combine known words to represent objects for which they have been taught no specific words). The closest humans seem to have come is to decypher the dance bees perform to indicate the direction and distance to sources of pollen.
You're placing humans on a pedestal which doesn't exist at the height you suggest.
You can state this as often as you wish but it will do nothing to change some facts you may not be terribly comfortable with.
There is no known reason why thinking, (either that of humans or that of other animals), can't be replicated at a mechanical or bio-mechanical level.
If dolphins had intelegence of people they would develope communication to the point that if we didn't communicate with them they would communicate with us.
This brings us to an interesting point.
The intelegence of animals must have been measured scientifically.
So the maximum intellegence of an animal is which animal and has the equivelent intelegence of what age of a human.
Duane
I have a general question for all.
If a chimp was found that was aware and could be communicated with on our mental level in his/her language or ours, the animal would be placed on a pedestal.
The gorilla Koko used sign language and communicated very human-like emotions. You can read about it here.
That's not a prejudice against humans, just a statement that we are amazed at things which we believe to be impossible. It should certainly be impossible for a chimpanzee, which has only a fraction of the brain size as that of a human, could ever converse with a human on an equal level.
Of course, if chimpanzees are taught language, they can converse with humans, but more on the level of a small child, not an equal level.
Actually they'd probably sing it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?