Re: cognitive != observable?

Ray Gardener wrote:

> > Before the collision there is a blinker - after the
> > collision there is no blinker (if memory serves me).  I call
> > that an interaction and that interaction is quite
> > independant of any particular observer.  You could rig a
> > light to be on when the blinker was present and off after
> > the collision ... look ma no consciousness necessary.
>
>
> Uh, not so fast. You'd have to program a machine to identify the blinker in
> order for the light to tell when it was present or not, so the
> identification is still being done by you, a conscious entity, even if you
> are deferring the moment of action response until later.

Point taken.  I was just tryin to establish that it is 
reasonable to look at everyting as process (even 
consciousness) and that processes interact with or without 
consciousness.

Where might this discussion be going?

Patty