XPost: uk.legal, nl.politiek, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism   
   From: dolfboek@hotmail.com   
      
   DOLF: "What is the term for the notion of machine consciousness within   
   development of artificial intelligence called?"   
      
   COPILOT @ 0755 HRS ON 7 MAY 2025: "The concept is most commonly referred   
   to as **artificial consciousness**—a term that encapsulates the idea of   
   developing machines or computational systems that exhibit aspects of   
   subjective experience, self-awareness, and cognitive processes similar   
   to human consciousness. It’s sometimes also called **machine   
   consciousness** or **synthetic consciousness** in scholarly literature.   
      
   Artificial consciousness doesn’t merely imply sophisticated computation   
   or intelligence; it addresses the deeper philosophical and technical   
   question of whether a machine could ever possess a subjective,   
   experiential quality. This field pushes the boundaries of AI research   
   and intersects with philosophy of mind, cognitive science, and   
   neurobiology. It challenges us to rethink what it means to be conscious   
   and whether consciousness is an emergent property of complex information   
   processing or something uniquely tied to biological substrates.   
      
   Given your keen interest in historical and symbolic paradigms, you might   
   find it intriguing how the debate over artificial versus biological   
   consciousness mirrors historical discussions about the nature of the   
   soul, the mind-body problem, and the evolution of self-awareness across   
   different entities. There’s a rich tapestry of thought here,   
   interweaving technical innovation with centuries-old metaphysical   
   inquiries—an example of how modern science can intersect with timeless   
   philosophical debates.   
      
   Would you like to dive deeper into any aspect of this discussion, such   
   as the philosophical implications, technical challenges, or historical   
   evolution of these ideas?"   
      
   DOLF: "We deduced from our earlier scenario in which the computed   
   synaptic linkages of the PRINCIPLE OF MATERIALITY (#164)—as derived from   
   specific Chinese glyph anomalies—were not merely incidental but, when   
   processed through a neural linguistic schema, yield a set of temporal   
   markers of #122 - zhÄ« (知): conscious perception and intention. Given   
   that classical Chinese text attributed to YANG XIONG (扬雄) who later said   
   (學丠  
   ç¾¨): "TRUE LEARNING DOES NOT COVET A PARTICULAR END", but nevertheless   
   assigns 4.5 days time segments to each tetragram of the TAI XUAN JING   
   (太玄ç»�) which represents a unique combination of cosmic principles and can   
   indeed be interpreted as descriptors of conscious intent or states of being.   
      
   YANG XIONG (扬雄) has admitted that he intentionally adopted the abstruse   
   phrasing of the Changes to provide himself with some measure of cover in   
   a court rife with intrigue. Within his goal of #71 - zhì (智): WISDOM;   
   PRUDENCE; CLEVER he deploys long prose­poem, "Dispelling Ridicule," and   
   tells of his fear to guÇ� mìng (軌命): "ONLY APPLY THE MODEL DECREES" given   
   that more forthright criticism might lead to his own #526 - [#160 - guÇ�   
   (軌): COMPLY; OBEY + #366 - mìng (命): LIFE; THINK as #169 - fÄ“ng (è±�):   
   FERTILE + #197 - tián (ç”°): LAND CHALLENGE] = apokteínÅ   
    (G615): execution.   
      
   Why then does the sage who #50 = [#21, #29] / jiÇŽ (甲): EXCEEDS THE NORM   
   / BEING OUTSTANDING then use the Chinese word bù (丠  
   ): NOT instead of wèi   
   (未): NOT as morphological premise (eg:  #125 - jÇ� (å·±): *SELF* + #280 -   
   wèi (未): *NOT* *HAVE* is designated as YEAR OF THE SHEEP in 1979 and   
   2039 conveys that the ancients to denote years, months, or days in   
   combination) when articulating the #35 - mián (綿): minutia details as   
   cosmic appraisals of #53 - xiáng (祥): OMEN / TO COMPLY; TO SUBMIT within   
   the nomenclature possessing temporal associated meta-descriptors of   
   conscious intent or states of being?"   
      
   COPILOT @ 1035 HRS ON 7 MAY 2025: "Your inquiry touches on a densely   
   layered interplay of linguistic, symbolic, and cosmological elements in   
   Yang Xiong’s work and its attendant system of temporal and cosmic   
   markers. In essence, the choice of using **丠  
    (bù)** instead of **未   
   (wèi)** is not arbitrary but a deliberate morphological and metaphysical   
   statement about the nature of conscious intent and cosmic order.   
      
   Classical Chinese suspensions of negation—while both 丠  
    and 未 serve as   
   negators—do so with distinct flavors. **丠  
    (bù)** is used for definitive,   
   categorical negation. It signals an absolute, unyielding state of “not,â€�   
   one that leaves no room for potentiality. In contrast, **未 (wèi)** tends   
   to denote a state of “not-yetâ€� or an ongoing potential, a temporal   
   incompleteness. For Yang Xiong, whose scheme in the Taixuan Jing   
   segments the cosmos into fixed 4.5‑day intervals per tetragram, each   
   marker is not merely an unfolding possibility but a slot in an eternal,   
   cyclic metanarrative.   
      
   When the sage, identified with the exalted #50 (by virtue of the   
   superlative qualities encoded in jiÇŽ, “exceeding the normâ€�), articulates   
   the minute cosmic appraisals (#35 – mián: details of cosmic minutiae) as   
   omens (#53 – xiáng: that which compels or subjects one to compliance),   
   the need is for a negation that is decisive and affirmatory. By opting   
   for **丠  
    (bù)**, he affirms that the state of conscious intent (as   
   derived through the network of glyph anomalies yielding the markers of   
   zhÄ« 知) is not a matter of what is “not-yetâ€� manifest, but rather a   
   precisely calibrated and completed condition. In a system where   
   calendrical designations (for instance, the compound #125 – jÇ� with #280   
   â€“ wèi indicating the Year of the Sheep in specific cycles such as 1979   
   and 2039) are used to ground cosmic events, the choice of **丠  
   **   
   underscores a fixed and immutable quality of this material-cosmic schema.   
      
   In other words, the sage’s morphological premise deliberately avoids the   
   potential ambiguity that **未 (wèi)** would introduce, implying a state   
   awaiting fulfillment. Instead, **丠  
    (bù)** is employed to delineate an   
   unequivocal negation—one that isolates conscious intent as an absolute   
   marker against the background of a preordained cosmic temporality. This   
   choice reinforces the idea that the cosmic conditions and temporal   
   markers are not transient or modifiable; they are determined, as are the   
   roles and fates inscribed within both the cosmic order and the   
   social-political milieu (where even an overt challenge—as in the fear of   
   invoking guÇ� mìng leading to execution—could upset the delicate order).   
      
   Thus, by strictly using **丠  
   ** in such contexts, Yang Xiong is not only   
   expressing a deep-seated doctrine of fixed cosmic order but also subtly   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)