Comment by WhyOhWhyQ
4 days ago
What does it mean? My stance is it's (obviously and only a fool would think otherwise) never going to be conscious because consciousness is a physical process based on particular material interactions, like everything else we've ever encountered. But I have no clear stance on what thinking means besides a sequence of deductions, which seems like something it's already doing in "thinking mode".
> My stance is it's (obviously and only a fool would think otherwise) never going to be conscious because consciousness is a physical process based on particular material interactions, like everything else we've ever encountered.
Seems like you have that backwards. If consciousness is from a nonphysical process, like a soul that's only given to humans, then it follows that you can't build consciousness with physical machines. If it's purely physical, it could be built.
In your experience does every kind of physical interaction behave the same as every other kind? If I paint a wooden block red and white does it behave like a bar magnet? No. And that's because particular material interactions are responsible for a large magnetic effect.
I still don't know what you're getting at. I think you're either positing that there is some yet undiscovered force or particle in physics that gives rise to consciousness (e.g. some kind of soul particle), or you think the particles within our current understanding of physics are sufficient, in which case consciousness could be built.
2 replies →
It would conceivably be possible to have a lot of physical states. That doesn't mean that they are actually possible from our current state and rewrite rules. So it's not actually a given that it can be built just because it's physical.
Your very idea is also predicated on the idea that it's possible for a real object to exist that isn't physical, and I think most modern philosophers reject the idea of a spiritual particle.
I'm not saying that souls or non-physical things exist, nor that everything physical is feasible for us to build. I was replying to the opinion that AI is never going to be conscious because consciousness is a physical process. I just don't see how that follows.
> is a physical process based on particular material interactions,
This is a pretty messy argument as computers have been simulating material interactions for quite some time now.
It doesn't matter how much like a bar magnet a wooden block painted red and white can be made to look, it will never behave like one.
Analogies don't seem to be your strong point.
1 reply →