Searle: Is the Brain a Digital Computer?

I quite like the metaphor of the brain ‘tuning’ to the universe. It is consistent with the incredible plasticity of that structure and the developmental changes well known to occur in the foetal, neonate and infant brain. 

Incidentally, that time frame coincides with the gradual appearance of ego, sense of self, aboutness of thought etc

I quite like the metaphor of the brain ‘tuning’ to the universe. It is consistent with the incredible plasticity of that structure and the developmental changes well known to occur in the foetal, neonate and infant brain. 

Incidentally, that time frame coincides with the gradual appearance of ego, sense of self, aboutness of thought etc

So the brain is filter that has to tune to the right "station", which means seeing things largely of this world, from its PoV, than a larger picture of reality?

I could see that working out, good way to allow for Psi effects.

Is the Brain a Digital Computer?

The interesting thing is that if it is a physical mechanism, it could in principle be simulated by a digital computer of sufficient power. This seems to suggest that either the brain is equivalent to a computer, or the mind is at least partly something outside the brain.

By analogy, it would be impossible to simulate the behaviour of a TV set without access to the radio waves that drive it.
I definitely tend to assume that the mind is wholly or partly non-physical because that explains why AI is hard(!!), and why people seem to separate from their bodies in NDE's (and related phenomena).

The interesting thing is that if it is a physical mechanism, it could in principle be simulated by a digital computer of sufficient power. This seems to suggest that either the brain is equivalent to a computer, or the mind is at least partly something outside the brain.

By analogy, it would be impossible to simulate the behaviour of a TV set without access to the radio waves that drive it.
I definitely tend to assume that the mind is wholly or partly non-physical because that explains why AI is hard(!!), and why people seem to separate from their bodies in NDE's (and related phenomena).

I think AI, as in Machine Learning or Computational Linguistics or Game Playing, is hard because the problems are tackling so many variations. 

But I'm not sure that even if a brain is physical - in the sense of being made from the base non-conscious elements assumed in today's physics - it's role in producing Mind is able to be simulated. After all the structure of the body in the real world would not be realized in simulated space, where it would be created by a computer. (OTOH synthetic life, as in life that emulates our structure via in-organic materials, may be conscious regardless of what metaphysics is true.)

As one materialist philospher aptly put it, "Why would consciousness be more Frogger than Frog?"

So the brain is filter that has to tune to the right "station", which means seeing things largely of this world, from its PoV, than a larger picture of reality?

So maybe you could flesh out some detail on your understanding of this "station". And what exactly do you mean by "this world" in this sentence?

I could see that working out, good way to allow for Psi effects.

How so? Please show your workings.

So maybe you could flesh out some detail on your understanding of this "station". And what exactly do you mean by "this world" in this sentence?

I was referring to the Platonic aspects of Orch-OR, in the piece by Hamerroff:

The second feature was that particular spacetime curvatures and material states selected in organized (‘orchestrated’) OR events were not chosen randomly, as is proposed to be the case in Copenhagen and decoherence, but rather were influenced by what Penrose termed ‘non-computable Platonic values’ embedded in fundamental spacetime geometry. Within its very structure, the universe encoded mathematical truth, ethical and aesthetic values and qualia, with which our conscious thoughts and actions could resonate.

So there is a level of Platonic values, and then there's this level of reality ("this world"). It's something Penrose and Hammeroff have talked about in the past.

Also see Chopra/Hammeroff on possibility of a quantum soul:

The concept of consciousness existing outside the body (e.g. near-death and out-of body experiences, NDE/OBEs, or after death, indicative of a ‘soul’) is a staple of religious traditions, but shunned by conventional science because of an apparent lack of rational explanation. However conventional science based entirely on classical physics cannot account for normal in-the-brain consciousness. The Penrose-Hameroff ‘Orch OR’ model is a quantum approach to consciousness, connecting brain processes (microtubule quantum computations inside neurons) to fluctuations in fundamental spacetime geometry, the fine scale structure of the universe. Recent evidence for significant quantum coherence in warm biological systems, scale-free dynamics and end-of-life brain activity support the notion of a quantum basis for consciousness which could conceivably exist independent of biology in various scalar planes in spacetime geometry. Sir Roger Penrose does not necessarily endorse such proposals which relate to his ideas in physics. Based on Orch OR, we offer a scientific hypothesis for a ‘quantum soul’.

I'll try to find a free copy later. [Also see Plato's Affinity argument, wherein the Grecian argues interaction of the mind w/ the Universals shows the mind's immortality.)

How so? Please show your workings.

Orch-OR an an interpretation has been mentioned by Hameroff as having Psi-effects:

If correct, Orch OR can account for conscious causal agency, resolving problem 1. Regarding problem 2, Orch OR can cause temporal non-locality, sending quantum information backward in classical time, enabling conscious control of behavior. Three lines of evidence for brain backward time effects are presented. Regarding problem 3, Penrose OR (and Orch OR) invokes non-computable influences from information embedded in spacetime geometry, potentially avoiding algorithmic determinism. In summary, Orch OR can account for real-time conscious causal agency, avoiding the need for consciousness to be seen as epiphenomenal illusion. Orch OR can rescue conscious free will.

I was referring to the Platonic aspects of Orch-OR, in the piece by Hamerroff:



So there is a level of Platonic values, and then there's this level of reality ("this world"). It's something Penrose and Hammeroff have talked about in the past.

Also see Chopra/Hammeroff on possibility of a quantum soul:



I'll try to find a free copy later. [Also see Plato's Affinity argument, wherein the Grecian argues interaction of the mind w/ the Universals shows the mind's immortality.)


Orch-OR an an interpretation has been mentioned by Hameroff as having Psi-effects:

Ah, ok Chidi. I was thought we were heading towards a rare insight into some of your own speculations. Nevermind.

Ah, ok Chidi. I was thought we were heading towards a rare insight into some of your own speculations. Nevermind.

Well I [can] spin some fluffy stuff about the Magic & Mystery of Nature in lieu of any "workings" if you like.

Do you mean "computer" as in there is an input/output, or computer as in a Turing Machine? What is a "subset of universal computation", as in what is running the programs? For example, here's some stuff out there suggesting reality is Idealist and it is the Mind of God that runs the computer, or there are two frames of reality - the "physical" one of information and the higher frame where consciousness interacts with this information.

Also see Hammeroff talking about quantum structures vs a Turing Machine type device, given your previous writings re: God/Order/Abyss I'd be curious to know if what you mean is closer to something like this:

Is your brain really a computer, or is it a quantum orchestra tuned to the universe?

I mean computer as in something that mechanistically transforms information from one form to another. I think that our brains behave partly in this manner. But when the mechanism is a neural network where things are massively parallel instead of serial, and the operation of this neural network relies on billions of threshold values to digitize something that is analog, there is no longer merely a mechanism... there is a mechanism where the "surface area to volume ratio" is very high and what I mean is the mechanism is surrounded by ambiguity... ambiguity is the boundary or surface area between patterned regularity and the abyss of non-structure from which the will may manifest.

So a serial computer that processes a string of 1's and 0's is very fragile... a bit of ambiguity can break the whole process. The surface area to volume ratio is very low... it is like a boat of mechanistic action floating in the abyss of ambiguity. A tiny hole and it sinks. But a neural network is more like a sponge floating in the abyss of ambiguity - ambiguity interpenetrates everything - high surface area to volume ratio, so there are lots of opportunities for the will to act upon the mechanism. Every time there is a threshold value that splits an analog signal into either 1 or a 0 a decision is made and this decision is an opportunity for the will to act upon the mechanism.

Now how exactly the "will" whatever that is... can coordinate to operate on the billions of decisions being made at once to result in coherent action in line with the intent is anyone's guess. But I agree that here the orchestra model or tuning model provides greater insight than the computer analogy. Somehow a resonance can occur where the patterns of tiny molecules in the brain synch up with a pattern from somewhere else or somewhen else. IMO, this is what a spirit is. A spirit is a constellation of patterns of behavior and emotion and experiences that can resonate with a high surface area mechanism to recreate the same patterns in that mechanism. So we have the 5 physical senses, but the 6th sense is the brain itself which can "phase lock" or resonate or whatever word you want to use... it can synch up with... something.

What I meant by the universe is a computer is that all physical interactions could be thought of as computation. The prime duality is subject/object which we could rephrase as experience/information. There is experience and there is symbol which stands for that experience. All symbol is grounded in experience. So for example, the long string of physical interactions from the Big Bang to the formation of the sun to the molecules shedding photons to the light interacting with a tree and the growth process of that tree that raised it up into your view all resulting in your experience of the tree... all of that could be thought of as a computation resulting in your experience. Or to time-reverse it... your experience of the tree could be symbolized by the long string of physical interactions that preceded it. When you take a picture of the tree and burn it to a CD (I feel old saying that) and then pop the CD into a computer and the computer bounces light off the ridges and valleys and then transforms the electrical signals into a picture of the tree, there is computation generating an experience... a transformation of symbols resulting in your experience. We consider the ridges and valleys to be information because we made them for ourselves to use and experience, but why not consider the tree itself to be information that was made for us to experience?

So the world out there is information being processed and that which is in formation is subjective experience. So basically everything that is not experience is a computer.

So the world out there is information being processed and that which is in formation is subjective experience. So basically everything that is not experience is a computer.

Ah I think I understand...so, in Arvan's terms, the physical is the 2-D information horizon but consciousness is the reader of information that actualizes the possibilities of the "code" on the "disk" that is the 2-D plane?