X-Message-Number: 25113 Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:56:50 -0700 From: Mike Perry <> Subject: Patternist View of a Person Dear Richard, You wrote: >Dear Mike, > >I well understand your view of the soul, as a pattern. However, >this viewpoint suffers from the many problems I have brought up: > >1. A pattern cannot experience anything. Fundamentally, we are >experiencers of a subjective inner-life---of this thing we call >consciousness. Since a pattern cannot have this property, we cannot >fundamentally be a pattern. I'm not sure you understand how I mean a person can persist as a pattern or body of information. I distinguish between what I call (1) the conservation of identity and (2) the expression of identity. Conservation occurs through information describing the person. Expression occurs if that information is loaded or imprinted in a suitable device and it "runs" or "executes" the person. At that point the person (not the device) has new experiences and adds to the store of memories and so on. The body of information describing the person is enlarged, or otherwise edited. Clearly expression is needed for consciousness and qualia experience to occur. But again, I would say that the device that "runs" the person (I can't think of a better term) doesn't experience anything, the person does. As for the possibility that somewhere there is another device with a similar "program" which, in effect is running the same person having the same experiences, the two make two instantiations of the one person, not two separate persons. >2. A pattern has no objectiven existence. Your brain pattern is >encoded into a rock and many other things in this universe, >according to various interpretive schemes. If any algorithm qualifies as an "interpretive scheme" and all are treated on an equal footing, you are obviously right. However, I submit that this is not reasonable at all but that there are what we can consider reasonable interpreters such that the information content will be far from arbitrary but instead be interpreter-independent and intelligible as some definite thing, *if suitably structured.* The reasonable interpreters might correspond to curious, highly intelligent space aliens who had no knowledge of human culture or languages but found a very long record consisting of many bits imprinted on some storage medium and wondered what it might mean. We may assume this record is linearized to a string of bits. A possible approach to make a reasonably intelligible record would be to encode a sequence of still pictures or a movie or several in a simple format. We might use a format in which the bits come in groups, say, of 2^24 (16,777,216), with each grouping representing a monochrome bit image with dimensions 4,096 x 4,096, equivalent to 2 megapixels of data. We would need to cue the aliens that the record represented a succession of scanned images. The trick would be to use certain patterns of bits repetitively in certain ways to suggest the structuring. We would have to have ways of representing bits within a scanned line of each image, and within the image as a whole. We would also need a convention to separate images. All this should not be hard to do in a way that intelligent creatures could guess. Each image, for instance, would be exactly the same size and could be bordered by some bit pattern that would always be repeated. The repetitions would be easy to spot. We could make sure that border-repetitions occurred for strings of length 2^12 which in turn would fall within strings with different border-repetitions of length 2^24, suggesting square arrays with the desired dimensions. Gray scale within an image could be represented by setting rather than clearing a bit, with the desired probability. The aliens should soon suspect that the repetitive groupings referred to pictures in a square format, and try projecting the resulting images. Voila! A first picture might show a simple geometric pattern to tell them they were onto something! From there you could proceed to many other things, including details relating to a specific person. On the way you could give a tutorial to explain your natural language, using mathematics and various scientific disciplines which the aliens should understand, and branching into other areas of knowledge. In all, I submit, a decipherable record could be produced that would describe a person or a whole civilization or whatever you wanted to describe. This is one possible approach, in effect using a movie format. You might use others, starting with simple mathematical relationships, for example which would be evident from the patterns recorded. (Math could be a stepping-stone to other areas of knowledge, and perhaps a good place to start for creatures of unknown background.) So, if it is suitably done, a record can be self-decipherable and self-explanatory, which will not occur with arbitrary information patterns such as the molecular details of rocks. Best wishes, Mike Perry Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25113