But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.
In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.
Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,
is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.
Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid.
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.
Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,
is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.
Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into
. Unlike
, which are related to physical matter, and
, which are related to the fabric of reality,
are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html
Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:
I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.
Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.
If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.
Well you just added a bunch of stuff to what I said that came out of no where. How dod you get that I only think of humans as a machine? Where did your entire first two paragraphs come from?
Solid matter does not encompass all gases, solids and liquids because those three things are different states of matter. Solid matters refers to solid things, not to gases, liquids, or plasmas.
I think therefore I am. If a computer has artificial intelligence, what is truly stopping it from being alive? A heart? Blood? Emotions? Well, if it is truly AI, then emotions wouldn't be a problem. Emotions are a part of what makes us intelligent beings. It almost makes us complete idiots at times, but that's neither here nor there.
Thinking does not only mean it is trying to solve a problem using a formula. And by whose definition is a robot never alive? Yours? Because that's the only way i can see you saying that. Just because something doesn't agree with your own personal definition, doesn't mean it's false.
a·live
/əˈlaɪv/ Show Spelled[uh-lahyv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having life; living; existing; not dead or lifeless.
2.
living (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive.
3.
in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive.
4.
full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries.
5.
having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
6.
Electricity . live2 ( def. 17 ) .
I see nothing in the dictionary definition of 'alive' that contradicts a robot being a live. Minus the spirit part because that is not measurable in any way as of yet.