A Mechanical Theory of Mind

As much as I hate to admit it, Hobbes' theory of mind was essentially correct. I liken the mind and brain to software and hardware.

Although both hardware and software are both "material things" they are different types of material. One's configuration is set and the other is easily changeable. This allows for modal processing of disparate information types (disparate physically interactive organizations of cascading causal sequence). States (or different configurations) of physically interactive organizations, interact with one another, change the states of one another, some of which can be reconfigured to input and output different configurations of physically interactive organizations. This is called software. Hardware based physically interactive organizations spit out only a definite type and number of physically interactive organizations. "Software" may be re-programmed on the fly (by another physically interactive organization (PIO)) either by hardware or software. The difference is the physical make-up.

This is what I was getting at with hardware and software. Why do I care? Because this is exactly how I theorize the brain and mind to operate.

The brain is the physically interactive organizations of material which is not easily altered, or altering it damages the processing capability. There are a definite number of states allowed. The "mind" is still material based (outside looking in) and is simply the physically interactive organizations which are modal - have re-definable states. They can be altered by inputs (either hard or soft) to accept new configurations of information collections, which I would guess is based on basic binary. On or off. True or false. Assertion or not. X or ~X. Sensations or not, etc.

It is my opinion, the point the brain leaves the mind is the point when one of the physically interactive organizations becomes a "kernel" like program - and evolves to perform some kind of data redundancy over the entire field of sub-processes, including itself, linking and finding patterns.

Add the ability to the kernel's organization to spit out new patterns based on existing patterns after a set period, not entirely random but not entirely willed either. Electricity or perhaps blood or chemicals course through the brain firing neurons, bringing random memories, sensations and thoughts (stored organizations) to the kernel (literally random physical interactions in the brain causing chain reactions of physical organizations interacting with other organizations - I hypothesize this is what certain brain waves are - some are the random fluctuations of interactions, some are the non-random reactions to interactions - I further hypothesize the cessitation of said physical stimuli is brain death) which seeks to recognize and extrapolate based on said patterns. Certain inputs (a familiar sensation) can cause the proclivity to recognize and extrapolate similar patterns to increase or decreases based on similarity (certain tunes bring other melodies to mind - while also making it difficult to imagine other melodies which are not alike).

The inner view (otherwise known as the intelligible method) can trace and examine up to the effects of the kernel. This is the breadth and depth of conscious thought, with the effects in which we can infer on the causes in sub-conscious thought as to its inner workings.

Examining any deeper seems to have to be done through the outer view - by cutting open a brain and watching how the neurons interrelate, which is no longer the domain of philosophy.

Can self-consciousness be a mistake?

Self-Consciousness is an error, a programming mistake. An anomally. A general protection fault. Contradiction is the catalyst of consciousness and philosophy. That which shouldn't be but is. Non-thinking material causing self-reflective existence. It can only be a paradox. It is a paradox.

This coheres with the theory of random genetic mutation. But how can a mistake, a parameter incorrectly passed, the parser not understanding the command line (what is the mind equivolent?) cause consciousness? or even self-consciousness?

Cause and effect -> pattern recognition and memory plus behaviour stimulus -> levels of pattern recognition and extrapolation in simple and cluster concepts, and imagination of senses -> imagining concept of self = self?

Is self-consciousness then a by-product of imagination, both in origin and cause?

What is Creativity?

Creativity is a word to describe the Logical / Mathematical Pattern Recognition and Extrapolation (called LMPRE for short) sub-process that functions in our sub-consciousness. In fact, most of our reasoning is accomplished in this way. Ideas “come to us”. They are not voluntary. We understand something when we focus on it long enough, not on command. At least I can’t. If you can great. For me, I think about the particular parameters “What order should I perform these functions?” list functions in mind, list places they are, determine shortest distances, guesstimate travel times and other roadblocks, then it comes to me: a thought, a judgment call, an itinerary is generated and “pops” into my head. You don’t “think something” you “think about something” (allow your LMPRE to process the complex relations of the problem at hand) and if you think on something long enough an answer comes to you from your LMPRE (a conclusion based on the given rules of the particular problem and the logical matrix within your understanding of reality, represented by a sub-conscious matrix of language / math and causation which is an aggregate representation of your understanding of reality). When you fail to get the right answer or think of something it is because your LMPRE has failed to take into account all the relations and variables at hand.

We can voluntarily focus our self-consciousness on a pattern to determine the relation between objects we are trying to discern, but it is from our sub-consciousness, from our intuition, namely the ever running sub-process which detects and extrapolates based on patterns of logical relations which once it finds a match for the pattern we have focused upon, it returns with the (I)idea. We see it. We then understand. We then understand and say “Oh, I see. I get it now”. Why did you not understand before if thought is voluntary? Because not all thought is voluntary. Creativity is not voluntary – it is a sub-process.

Creativity describes people who are better at doing what I have described. All humans seem to possess it, some more than others. Even animals have Problem solving and Pattern Recognition to a lesser degree. People whose LMPRE is more advanced, can spider (if you will) more of the logical matrix of belief (each node on the matrix is a proposition believed to be true, the relations are inferences from proposition to proposition) sub-consciously and come back with responses that are within (for mundane answers) or beyond (for creative answers) the current ruleset. Creative people simply have a sub-consciousness that through genetics and training (musical training for the most part: jazz and classical) have an LMPRE that can spider more of the matrix to produce exceptions further along the inference chain – further than other sub-consciousnesses. These people appear more creative. Artists do this sub-consciously – they are creative. They are “inspired”. They do not have a conscious understanding of their logical matrix of belief. The wise do this consciously – they have a conscious understanding of their logical matrix of belief, they consciously (and mush more slowly) spider the logical matrix looking for contradictions in their beliefs - improper inferences. The wise (in so far that they are wise) see the big picture and how it all interrelates – the creative (in so far that they are creative) are not consciously aware of it but see only parts, but their LMPRE comes up with exceptions to the rules by spidering deeper into the if/then scenarios and other logical relations in their matrix of belief. It’s like when you get an idea of what you need to do without even explicitly stating it in your mind. Not all thought is verbal – LMPRE certainly isn’t.

For example, when Captain Kirk re-programmed the test so that he could pass the no win situation, that’s called thinking outside the box. Creativity is exactly “thinking outside the box”. That means that psyche possesses an LMPRE that can process quicker and in more depth a larger part of the matrix at one time and as such can come back with more and better quality exception to the rules in which it was forced (by the self-consciousness) to operate under.