Comment by suddenlybananas
17 hours ago
>How do you know that artificial neurons are less capable of producing consciousness than biological ones? How can other people independently verify this?
How do you know that toasters or rocks aren't conscious?
The only thing you can do is ask rhetorical questions to make your position seem obvious. Which should tell you how little you understand the thing in question.
My point is it is very difficult to disprove that something has consciousness. What would be sufficient evidence that a rock is not conscious? The onus is on those making extraordinary claims (that a computer program is conscious) to provide evidence for it.
it's not very difficult, it's impossible right now. you know you yourself are conscious and that's all that you can prove. you can extrapolate to other people and animals and plants but that's not proof
>The onus is on those making extraordinary claims (that a computer program is conscious) to provide evidence for it.
By saying that a computer program is not conscious you are also making an extraordinary claim. You would have to hold an agnostic position until there is a test for consciousness.
You are relying on intuitive obviousness and rhetoric to make the opposing side look ridiculous "how could a TOASTER be conscious, preposterous!", you aren't making a actual positive argument for your view.
2 replies →
LLMs are able to do almost everything that we consider human intelligence, and in many areas of intelligence, they have surpassed us. It's not at all extraordinary to assume they're conscious.
2 replies →