Mind machine

I want to share my theory of mind decomposed into a finite state machine model. Strictly ask my homegrown theory not to criticize. Constructive criticism and ideas are welcome. In connection with zero karma I am not sure that I can respond to comments on my own post, but this is already a lyric.

Let us drop the questions. How did it happen that the mind machine was launched, leaving this topic to more qualified specialists? We also leave behind the scenes the logic of the gradient of the evolution of living organisms, which seems to exist and is very interesting. We focus on the formalization of the concept of mind in the framework of the formal theory of finite automata. Again, let us leave behind the scenes how I came to this theory, because of course it is impossible to call it a scientific activity, but a certain amount of reflection and research was undoubtedly carried out.
If we reject the concept of a miracle, then the minimal living organism can be considered the most primitive realization of the mind. In fact, this is not quite true, because the first molecule that grows and breaks up into living parts is the most primitive mind, but it is more interesting for the study of the evolution gradient. At the same time, it is obvious that this abstract primitive organism acts as a whole according to a very primitive algorithm. Such an algorithm can be described as an example as follows using the example of an abstract unicellular creature. We float into the light, swallow food, float into the dark, hide, digest, share and so on in a cycle until system errors lead to degradation of functions and the inability to realize the process of life and our system collapses, that is, it dies. And it is known from the theory of algorithms that any algorithm has a morphism into a finite automaton. Based on this, at a certain level of abstraction, it is possible to hypothesize that the mind is equivalent to a finite state machine . Let us prove this by giving a formal definition of rationality and creating the theoretical construction of a rational system based on the concept of a finite automaton.
Our primitive organisms unite, grow and evolve, but remain nothing more than a system of finite automata that implement other automata as a result of joint emergent activity. And so the process of evolution proceeds until our automaton becomes rational. Let us ask ourselves what it means that our automaton has become rational from a more formal point of view than the Turing test. To do this, consider what is rational behavior from a system point of view. Let there be an object in a certain environment. We define its behavior as sensible if the object is able to act first purposefully , and secondly, to create new behavior algorithms based on the available information and own goals, i.e. be capable of knowing . I think few people will argue that such requirements to an object can be called quite objective criteria of reasonableness in the broad sense of the word. We do not consider interaction with other reasonable objects, since for our abstract intelligent object, other objects are environments.
Moving further in the formalization of our concepts and as expected we reduce everything to finite automata. The question arises, what are the objectives of the object and the model of their achievement . We interpret it as follows: there is an object, there is a medium, but according to our hypothesis our object is an automatic machine, and automatic machines are a dull system, therefore everything around it also considers automatic, and reflects the environment and itself into some kind of internal machine that interacts with some other internal automaton, sets the desired state of the automaton object-environment, which is interpreted as a goal. Further impact on the object-environment as an automaton with feedback to achieve the target state is trivial and possible both empirically and analytically. In my opinion quite realistic model.
But we have a second requirement: knowledge of the new properties of the environment to achieve its goals, namely, the problem of epistemology. Feel free to solve such a complex problem in the same concepts. Since for our stupid automaton everything around is also a lot of automata, knowledge comes down to the trivial process of identifying possible states and permissible transitions from these states and memorization, that is, a reflection of the automaton being studied on the internal automaton based on the experience (sic!). In my opinion, again, quite a realistic model. After studying and reflecting the scheme of the new machine, it is possible to start the process of achieving goals.
Summarize. Within the framework of the above theory, the concept of mind was formalized within the framework of the formalization of the process of achieving the goal and the process of cognition on the basis of the concept of a finite automaton, and an abstract theoretical construction was constructed that implements this concept. For opponents of the analog realization of life, instead of the word automaton, I used the word process specifically and refer to the theory of processes.
Many thanks to all who have mastered, for my style of presentation is very hard, as we know.