Axioms of consciousness

[paradoxparadigm7]

For those who haven't come across this.

http://youtu.be/1cO4R_H4Kww

 

[Cherry Cola]

it is what?

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

The axioms start at 22min. They are
Experience exists-the only thing we can be sure of
Experience is differentiated (one out of many)
Experience is unified (it is "one"): it cannot be reduced to non-interdependent components
Experience is unique (it is ONLY one)-in content and spatio-temporal grain: it is not a superposition of multiple experiences.

The video goes on to explain their formula of how to find out how conscious a system is. So for example, why Deep Blue or other very complex computers are functionally not conscious.

 

[Cognisant]

Experience is unified (it is "one"): it cannot be reduced to non-interdependent components
Experience is unique (it is ONLY one)-in content and spatio-temporal grain: it is not a superposition of multiple experiences.

Apparently neither are we.

To grossly oversimplify the brain has two hemispheres, it can operate with one, so it is in fact comprised of non-interdependent components and experiance is only unique as memory after the hippocampus has sorted it all out, every day you walk without consciously thinking about each step and another part of your brain is constantly listening for sounds relevant to you hence why you don't have to be consciously listening to hear your name in background noise.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

^^Yes, that is true, in so far as what the presenters are talking about (and if I'm understanding you correctly). Animals, we infer, also have a conscious experience especially mammals and those closest to us. What you said about the brain, is also encompassed in this particular presentation. What you're describing is the neural correlates of consciousness. Humans are not unique in possessing consciousness.

 

[Cognisant]

Deep Blue is not conscious but it is my prerogative to squelch any notion that a machine cannot be conscious, indeed I'd argue consciousness only exists insofar as words do, I mean you're reading my words right now so to us they clearly exist however they do not inherently exist, to one that does not speak or read English there is text but the words do not exist.

Likewise consciousness can be said to exist but it's not inherent, there is no soul.

To me this all appears to be a poorly veiled attempt at justifying such nonsense.

 

[Rook]

We are, in essence, biological robots.
Input, interpretation, storing of memories, output.
I may be over simplifying, but it holds some credence.


The question is, would an AI as complex as we be conscious?

With visual, audial and sensory inputs, and relevant outputs.
With the ability to process what it experiences, and take generated action based on these experiences.
If we give AI some form of free will, with processes that have the ability to change and adapt independent of outside control, will it be conscious?

 

[Cherry Cola]

Deep Blue is not conscious but it is my prerogative to squelch any notion that a machine cannot be conscious, indeed I'd argue consciousness only exists insofar as words do, I mean you're reading my words right now so to us they clearly exist however they do not inherently exist, to one that does not speak or read English there is text but the words do not exist.

Likewise consciousness can be said to exist but it's not inherent, there is no soul.

To me this all appears to be a poorly veiled attempt at justifying such nonsense.

You can extend that argument from words to everything. Everything you know is a result of consciousness.

You're arbitrarily dividing reality into levels where some things are more real than others for no reason by assuming that there is some sort of objective reality which everything references to.

 

[Cognisant]

No it's you that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater, making the jump from being skeptical of the flawed concept of souls to being skeptical of absolutely all experience, if absolute skepticism is all you've got then this argument is already over.

The question is, would an AI as complex as we be conscious?

With visual, audial and sensory inputs, and relevant outputs.
With the ability to process what it experiences, and take generated action based on these experiences.
If we give AI some form of free will, with processes that have the ability to change and adapt independent of outside control, will it be conscious?

If consciousness equates to self awareness and self awareness is the ability to formulate a concept of self then yes if an AI can formulate a conceptual understanding of its inputs and perceive itself (or at least its actions) with those inputs then it could formulate a self concept which would therefore make it self aware to some degree and thus you could accurately say it is conscious.

I have to be a lawyer with my words because consciousness isn't just a thing, there's a process with a lot going on so to say something is conscious because this or that specific reason is hard to do accurately without going into detail about what specific aspect of consciousness I'm talking about.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

Deep Blue is not conscious but it is my prerogative to squelch any notion that a machine cannot be conscious, indeed I'd argue consciousness only exists insofar as words do, I mean you're reading my words right now so to us they clearly exist however they do not inherently exist, to one that does not speak or read English there is text but the words do not exist.

Likewise consciousness can be said to exist but it's not inherent, there is no soul.

To me this all appears to be a poorly veiled attempt at justifying such nonsense.

We're in agreement (and I know of no one credible that makes claim). There is no known computer that we can infer has consciousness. If you're saying it could be possible in the future, sure, I can go with that. But it's my prerogative to question that possibility, at least with our knowledge of consciousness. In fact, why are you not following the work on consciousness? I would think, you who want to make that a reality, would welcome new work in this field.

Cherry, makes an excellent point.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

I wanted to add that this presentation is not a philosophical discussion of consciousness. The axioms pertain to the subjective experience and not self-awareness per se. They go into some formulas that you could find useful Cog in what it might take to build your conscious computer.