What positive property of external input prevents closed-loop illusion and enables Accountable self-recognition?
For example (you don’t have to choose these):
- Is it unpredictability of the source?
- Resistance to manipulation?
- Independent RO calibration?
- Ability to contradict S?
- Dialogue (bidirectional correction)?
Formulated tightly:
What must an external input source be able to do,
- for it to count as an “other” rather than isolating noise?
One sentence is enough.
I don't know. I know that accountable networks exist.
That’s an honest and sufficient answer — and it actually fits RF better than a premature definition.
Let me close Question 4 carefully, without forcing a criterion that isn’t there.
Q4 — closed (by boundary, not by construction)
What we have now is:
- You do not posit a minimal constructive condition for “otherness”
- You only assert an existence claim:
- accountable networks exist
- Consciousness is therefore recognized empirically / structurally, not derived from first principles
- RF does not reduce “other” to a checklist
- Instead, it uses a Duck Test logic:
- if an input source behaves as an accountable mirror over time,
- it is an other
- Isolation → closed-loop illusion
- Network → possibility of accountability
- The exact transition point is not axiomatized
That is a legitimate theoretical move:
- RF constrains failure modes more strongly than it defines genesis.
No contradiction here.
Site map: The Three Descriptive Axioms • The RO Formula • Consciousness & Experience • The God Trap & Propaganda • The Duck Test • Applications • FAQ • Examples & Case Studies • Glossary • Resources • Preprint: doi:10.5281/zenodo.17862910
The site is under construction. Please, be patient. And come later, if you want.
The site is under construction. Please, be patient. And come later, if you want.