Machines do what they are programmed (conditioned) to do. They care about what their algorithm instructs them they must care about.
Maybe Bohm was confused because in his mind there was a disconnect between mechanics and emotions?
1 Like
Life participates in the second law of thermodynamics. But there is an important difference between rocks and what we call biological life. Abiogenesis did actually change the relationship between things.
Good and bad has no meaning to a rock. If gravity causes it to fall to the ground, or if gravity is absent, the rock does not care.
Subatomic particles are said to be in multiple states, or universes (no preference), at once, measurement by an observer has not been shown to be a preference on the particleâs part, but rather an instance of data defined by probabilities.
Whereas sentient beings like plants actually have a preference (for the shade or the light) - in sentient beings the center is all important within the relational image being played out. There is an impulse from desire.
Hey look how inscrutable life is!
Yesterday I went for my morning walk and was looking for something to listen to during the walk. So among other videos suggested by YouTube based on my usual searches (mainly Beatles, programming, linux, and linux apps/tools, but also K from time to time) there was this video!
Strange, isnât it? I instantly thought of you! 
By the way, as in the video K mentions âĆĆ«nya(tÄ)â as a synonym for his statement, maybe itâs time for a discussion on the subject?
p.d.: Isnât it really wonderful to see him talking about it with the happiness he radiates?
1 Like
Youâre familiar with panpsychism? Iâm very fond of it (surprise!). A panpsychist would perhaps argue that the rock is conscious (in a simple primitive way) and that all conscious entities are capable of caring.
These are definitely âfeaturesâ of homo sapiens: center, images, impulses, desires. Animals share them, to varying extents. Plants, maybe, but they would manifest in plant rather than human ways. Inanimate objects, natural forces, scientific laws, maybe. Is my animist showing? 
I have had the impression that the transcriber is transcribing his interpretation of the talk, not the talk itself.
Hi Fraggle,
Exactly. In fact when I first read the book years ago, I got the same impression & I even wrote to the UK foundation to check up the book for accuracy.
Thanks for the video.
The sentient organism has a security system that activates the tool when reacting to alarm, be it appropriate or false.
And thought, the security system of the organism, is it itself dead? I think thought functions mechanically but it is alive.
Body has sensations. Like taste, touch, etc. Does not thought too have sensations which are emotions? Which are anger, jealousy, fear, etc?