I was thinking about natural selection and selection in general.

>>9109333

It's impossible to truly disprove what you're saying, and there have been arguments made for that sort of thing before, but to me it seems like the sheer breadth of human variety would preclude the mind arising deterministically from the factors around us. Still, the brain is very complex and poorly understood. It's possible. If it is the case, it probably depends on enough very tiny often-changing factors that it doesn't make much of a difference.

It's probably not something that we can know until we've fully mapped the consciousness onto the brain, and we're a hell of a long ways away from that.

>>9109535
chaotic != nondeterministic

File: slide_295928_2417592_original.jpg (879KB, 1942x3000px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 1942x3000px

>>9109333
>all of our traits are the results of what was most fit for the environment
not really.
they are the result of what was most fit out of the space of possibilities of the random mutations that happened in our particular ancestral lines, not the best possible ones.

File: 50 meter high sea-stack called Dun-Briste located in Knockaun, Ireland.jpg (74KB, 827x960px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 827x960px

>>9111048
We are the transition stage between chaos and order. Born out of the accidental quasi-order of chaos.
But we can create the
>best possible
organism, that is not limited to what probabilisic accidents spawned it, Artificial Intelligence!

>>9111048
Well if you think about it our brain does work like that. Think of things like learning. Synaptic pruning. The blindman with excellent hearing. Your brain is actively selecting appropriate models for what it encounters in its environment most frequently. This is part of something called neural darwinism, from the nobel prize winning edelman.