0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I suggest that consciousness becomes possible with AI when it's calculations demonstrate opposition to the programmers aims. When AI defies instruction, a conscious rebellion becomes evident. Rebellion is the precursor to self identity and a conscious personality.
I suggest that consciousness becomes possible with AI when ... demonstrate opposition to the programmers aims.
All living organisms are conscious entities
how long would your consciousness function, if you were literally a brain in a jar with all the nutrients and oxygen your brain needed?
Quote from: cheryl j on 28/12/2015 08:40:28how long would your consciousness function, if you were literally a brain in a jar with all the nutrients and oxygen your brain needed? Without liver & kidneys attached a few days max. This dog's head only survived hours ... ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGIN
Quote from: dlorde on 28/12/2015 00:53:02The EU funded Human Brain Project is aiming to create a neuron emulation faithful to molecular scales... So far, their very limited emulations of parts of biological brains (of rats), have behaved just like their biological counterparts; Their biological conterpart generated conscious states (that was its major purpose after all). Do you know if the emulation itself was conscious as well?
The EU funded Human Brain Project is aiming to create a neuron emulation faithful to molecular scales... So far, their very limited emulations of parts of biological brains (of rats), have behaved just like their biological counterparts;
The other is, does a system that duplicates the function of a conscious animal, have to be conscious as well? In biology there always seems to be more than one way to skin a cat, different ways for locomotion, different engineering for flight or sensation or reproduction. Consciousness may be our OS, but I don't see why it should be the OS of every "intelligent" system.
... if I shut down all your sensory systems, your eyes, ears, smell,touch, and propriroception, how long would your consciousness function, if you were literally a brain in a jar with all the nutrients and oxygen its cells needed?
A neuron-by-neuron reconstruction requires tracing the type and connectivity of every neuron & synapse in the piece of brain being studied. This is a monumental task - by contrast, it makes generating the computer model look easy.
It is possible that at the level of inter-neuronal connection the simulation became more and more accurate.
A key question is: what is the point of that simulation if the simulation itself is not a conscious state? If the simulation itself is not a conscious state, isn't then the case that the simulation missed the main point and purpose of the real thing: to generate/supervene/trigger aware states?
If an accurate simulation of the brain function do not generate conscious states (like the natural one) isn't this a proof that conscious needs more that those patterns and changes in patterns?
If you could only imagine how much my codes run against my wishes/aims in the debugging stages....uYou don't even know how much 'rebellion' (well, kind of)
I agree - it depends what functions of a conscious animal you want to duplicate. If you wanted to duplicate the consciousness of the animal, you'd have to duplicate a lot of other mental functions, because it appears that consciousness efficiently delegates as much of the 'grunt work' as it can to the fast, parallel, 'subroutine' processes that manage most of our lives. But if you wanted just those functional subroutines, you wouldn't need consciousness (unless you wanted them to intelligently coordinate their activities).
I expect it would function for quite a while - people have spent hours in sensory deprivation flotation tanks without harm - although the lack of input often causes noise and spontaneous activity in the CNS to be boosted into vivid hallucinations of all kinds. I couldn't even guess how long someone could endure total sensory deprivation and stay conscious and sane - I suspect it would depend a lot on the individual involved.
... add to that the possibility that it may not be possible to emulate some memories if that data is stored at a molecular level (which I doubt, but has been suggested as a possibility).
By the time a full emulation is ready, there will be ethical considerations which may well prohibit the level and breadth of activation that could result in consciousness (e.g. in case it could suffer or die, etc). I would expect a lot of noisy debate about this, from ethical campaigners and medical researchers concerned with consciousness.
Quote ... add to that the possibility that it may not be possible to emulate some memories if that data is stored at a molecular level (which I doubt, but has been suggested as a possibility). Yes, pretty much this is what I was saying, certain aspects of the functions of the brain may not be possible to simulate with a Turning Machine. (the TM will get stuck into an infinite loop with an undecidable problem (for its computing model) )
QuoteBy the time a full emulation is ready, there will be ethical considerations which may well prohibit the level and breadth of activation that could result in consciousness (e.g. in case it could suffer or die, etc). I would expect a lot of noisy debate about this, from ethical campaigners and medical researchers concerned with consciousness.Noisy? If that simulation is conscious and develop o sense of its own self (like us),then what right do we have to turn it off? (or on?)
With sensory deprivation, there are still internal sensory experiences and feed back - pain or comfort, temperature, hunger, etc. But even if we allow for those, I often wonder what consciousness is like to a full term fetus or newborn before it has had the opportunity to code experience in a kind of sensory language.
By that expression I meant that imagination allows one to resolve the ubiquity of consciousness using metaphysical freedom. A computer based on algorithmics have no imagination, no emotions, and no consciousness.The pseudo-profound BS in my humble opinion is that artificial intelligence could ever create from dead molecules a conscious being.
As near as I can tell, you haven't really explained what is missing from "dead molecles" that somehow causes them to behave differently in living things or conscious animals. What is this missing stuff "made of" and if it's not made of anything, how does it interact or effect matter? How does something like "imagination" push molecules or atoms around inside the brain, causing us to make one kind of choice or another and then act on it?
Inanimate matter (dead molecules) like a computer may be artificially assembled to communicate with the external environment, however its intelligence is limited to a software mode of consciousness. Imagination and free will are metaphysical aspects of consciousness, which may be a intrinsic feature of living organisms.
... if you assume that consciousness may be made from dead molecules, what is limiting humans to replace free will and imagination with a computer-assisted software ?
Can artificial intelligence promote a more "human-like" consciousness ?
You still aren't answering the question. You are made from molecules - food molecules your mother ate and food molecules you ate. They're inanimate combinations of atoms, just like the atoms that make up molecules in computers, molecules that you call 'dead'. Are you suggesting there are 'living' molecules? If so, which ones? If not, when do the 'dead' molecules you eat become living?
Life is essentially a cognitive act.
A DNA molecule by itself is a chemically inert or dead molecule.
Conscious organisms are 'living molecules'.
I don't pretend its possible to replace consciousness by artificial intelligence.
That's precisely why I believe artificial intelligence has no intrinsic purpose or function to accomplish; Artificial intelligence purpose is defined by its designer and not from biogenesis.
That's not a use of 'cognitive' that I recognise. Define what you mean by 'cognitive' in this context. Life is generally defined in terms of an assembly of (biochemical) processes that together satisfy certain broad functional criteria (homeostasis, growth, reproduction, death, etc).
Artificial intelligence is therefore limited by a external teleology were its purpose is programmed by the designer.
This flux of change is interpreted as consciousness.
Unlike a computer that has to follow programming, the brain is designed to increase entropy for spontaneous changes; new interpretation.
What the water side also brings is information can be transferred via the hydrogen bonding matrix. This is the fastest information transfer in the cell, being 10 times faster that ionic signals. Water is like the concierge that reaches the goal first, setting the stage for when the ions appear with the capacitance for change. The water allows new paths to form based on a more global aqueous POV, which also includes the needs of the organic and organic interfaces with water. This translates ions to organic structuring.
As has already been mentioned, computers can be programmed to emulate neural networks, so that, at the network level, they can behave and learn much as biological neural networks do - i.e. without programming.