First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
Post Reply Artificial consciousness is impossible
27291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 6/8/16 , edited 6/8/16
(Edit: Preface: I am forced to put this here because people don't investigate the actual argument. There is an inherent contradiction in the activity of programming without programming)

Consciousness is a separate issue from intelligence, and since this has come up again I am going to do this in a separate thread to avoid crowding the machine IQ thread with off-topic replies.

Thesis: It is not possible to have a conscious AI.

The proof of this starts with Searle's Chinese Room demonstration.

John Searle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Searle

Chinese Room
http://www.iep.utm.edu/chineser/

It was Searle's argument against what he called "Strong AI" which is really conscious AI, as distinguished from non-conscious AI with general intelligence (i.e. intelligence in solving non-specific problems).

From the conclusion of the Chinese Room demonstration, I would then apply logical induction in the following form:

-The Chinese Room demonstrates that outward appearance of an understanding of meaning is by no means an actual indicator of understanding. (conclusion of Chinese Room)

-Bona fide understanding is a main feature of conscious thinking. If something is not conscious, it is not possible for it to understand. (Assertion. To demonstrate problems with this step, one would have to question how understanding is not a main feature)

-What goes on inside the Chinese Room is an analog of programming. AI is dependent on programming. (Chinese Room demonstrates programming via a scheme in the from of an infinitely large lookup table. To question this, I've had people attacking the semantic isolation between the outside and the inside of the room- Which I answered via elaborating the original Chinese Room to include things such as display monitors showing nothing but index references and keyboard inside the room inputing nothing but index references in turn)

-Thus, what AI accomplishes in fooling someone in thinking that it has any sort of comprehension of meaning, is a demonstration of a mere appearance of comprehension. It would only appear to be sentient, while being as non-sentient as any program. (Semantic isolation of Chinese Room combined with its demonstrated programming mechanic results in the semantic isolation of ALL programs)

-The only way for anyone to demonstrate the possibility of consciousness in an AI is to demonstrate independence from programming. (This is indeed what's needed to defeat the above demonstration- To show programming without programming)

-There is no such demonstration. Bottom-up AI, including experiments showing the purported evolution of bottom-up AI, still requires programming. (No counter-demonstration, Q.E.D.)

In the process, I had also been asked clarify my exact definition of consciousness. It is the following.

A conscious entity, i.e. a mind, must possess

1. Intentionality http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intentionality/
"Intentionality is the power of minds to be about, to represent, or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs" Note that this is not mere symbolic representation and conversion, as already shown by the Chinese Room argument.

2. Qualia http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia/
"Feelings and experiences vary widely. For example, I run my fingers over sandpaper, smell a skunk, feel a sharp pain in my finger, seem to see bright purple, become extremely angry. In each of these cases, I am the subject of a mental state with a very distinctive subjective character. There is something it is like for me to undergo each state, some phenomenology that it has. Philosophers often use the term ‘qualia’ (singular ‘quale’) to refer to the introspectively accessible, phenomenal aspects of our mental lives. In this broad sense of the term, it is difficult to deny that there are qualia."
20984 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 6/8/16 , edited 6/12/16
Correction it's not possible right now.

It may be in the future consciousness like a human has is not special.

All of this is theoretical and there are many arguments for and against it.

It's stupid to simply believe it's impossible or it is possible you don't know the future or all the variables.

If it's impossible for artificial consciousness to exist then we should not exist as we are not special.

Many professionals will have their own views and theories and that's fine but it's nothing more then a theory
Posted 6/8/16
I'm not reading through all of that, but this has been my stance regarding AI for a long time.

We don't even understand how our own consciousness works, or where and how it is formed (obviously it's origins is in the brain, but I'm talking about specificity), so how could we make artificial intelligence?
If AI comes about it would be by coincidence, rather than purposely made.

Also just because we don't understand something, doesn't make imaginary sky daddies real.
824 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/16
The counterargument to the chinese room experiment is that consciousness, artificial or otherwise, is an illusion. In fact, the argument goes, we are doing just what the man behind the opening is doing: reacting to experiences and stimulants based on our genetic instructions.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/16
Here we go again, on this endless circus of value.
27291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 6/8/16 , edited 6/8/16

Ryulightorb wrote:

Correction it's not possible right now.

It may be in the future consciousness like a human has is not special.

All of this is theoretical and there are many arguments for and against it.

It's stupid to simply believe it's impossible or it is possible you don't know the future or all the variables.

If it's impossible for artificial consciousness to exist then we should not exist as we are not special.

Many professionals will have their own views and theories and that's fine but it's nothing more then a theory


"May" is not a proper counterargument. In the future there "may" be pink elephants appearing and disappearing everywhere you look, along with the flying pigs they ride upon.

"It's theoretical" and "nothing more than a theory" is simply another form of "entitled to opinion" logical fallacy. I will not respond to red herring.

"Special" in exactly which way? Too much hand waving.
20984 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 6/8/16

nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Correction it's not possible right now.

It may be in the future consciousness like a human has is not special.

All of this is theoretical and there are many arguments for and against it.

It's stupid to simply believe it's impossible or it is possible you don't know the future or all the variables.

If it's impossible for artificial consciousness to exist then we should not exist as we are not special.

Many professionals will have their own views and theories and that's fine but it's nothing more then a theory


"May" is not a proper counterargument. In the future there "may" be pink elephants appearing and disappearing everywhere you look, along with the flying pigs they ride upon.

"It's theoretical" and "nothing more than a theory" is simply another form of "entitled to opinion" logical fallacy. I will not respond to red herring.

"Special" in exactly which way? Too much hand waving.


And still none of those reasons make what you say the truth.

31690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / M / Planet KLK-X
Offline
Posted 6/8/16
Just because artificial consciousness hasn't been created (or evolved) yet doesn't mean it's impossible.

I would agree it's impossible with conventional computers and programming. It has to be a massively parallel, very compact system... like the 100 billion neurons packed into your brain. Nothing with wires and transistors can even come close to something like it. Not even the brain of an ant (250,000 neurons) can be mimicked with conventional computer circuits. Not to mention the billions of years of evolution which lead up to such incredibly complex structures.

But brains are physical, electro-chemical structures acting in accordance with the laws of nature and thus building some sort of artificial consciousness is theoretically possible.
27291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 6/8/16 , edited 6/8/16

foraslan wrote:

The counterargument to the chinese room experiment is that consciousness, artificial or otherwise, is an illusion. In fact, the argument goes, we are doing just what the man behind the opening is doing: reacting to experiences and stimulants based on our genetic instructions.


That doesn't turn away the existence of the subjective experience (see quoted red term above). If you're arguing against subjective experience itself, then it goes beyond the bounds of the Chinese Room argument.


Ryulightorb wrote:


nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Correction it's not possible right now.

It may be in the future consciousness like a human has is not special.

All of this is theoretical and there are many arguments for and against it.

It's stupid to simply believe it's impossible or it is possible you don't know the future or all the variables.

If it's impossible for artificial consciousness to exist then we should not exist as we are not special.

Many professionals will have their own views and theories and that's fine but it's nothing more then a theory


"May" is not a proper counterargument. In the future there "may" be pink elephants appearing and disappearing everywhere you look, along with the flying pigs they ride upon.

"It's theoretical" and "nothing more than a theory" is simply another form of "entitled to opinion" logical fallacy. I will not respond to red herring.

"Special" in exactly which way? Too much hand waving.


And still none of those reasons make what you say the truth.



Exactly how? Should I say the same "nothing what you say make what you say true" back to you?
8742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Disboard
Online
Posted 6/8/16
Artificial consciousness is impossible in the same way that flying or going to the moon was impossible. People only thought it was impossible up until the moment it was done.

At this point in time it is ignorant to claim anything impossible. If you still insist on claiming it impossible fine whatever but still try anyways because eventually you'll find out its not.

If it has happened once in nature then we can make it happen again.
13626 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 6/8/16
My thoughts on this topic or rather my thoughts on arguments about this topic between certain users https://goo.gl/adPy8h .
27291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 6/8/16

sena3927 wrote:

Just because artificial consciousness hasn't been created (or evolved) yet doesn't mean it's impossible.

I would agree it's impossible with conventional computers and programming. It has to be a massively parallel, very compact system... like the 100 billion neurons packed into your brain. Nothing with wires and transistors can even come close to something like it. Not even the brain of an ant (250,000 neurons) can be mimicked with conventional computer circuits. Not to mention the billions of years of evolution which lead up to such incredibly complex structures.

But brains are physical, electro-chemical structures acting in accordance with the laws of nature and thus building some sort of artificial consciousness is theoretically possible.


It not possible because whatever you build, requires programming. Once programming is there, you are locked into the Chinese Room.
20984 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 6/8/16

nanikore2 wrote:


foraslan wrote:

The counterargument to the chinese room experiment is that consciousness, artificial or otherwise, is an illusion. In fact, the argument goes, we are doing just what the man behind the opening is doing: reacting to experiences and stimulants based on our genetic instructions.


That doesn't turn away the existence of the subjective experience (see quoted red term above). If you're arguing against subjective experience itself, then it goes beyond the bounds of the Chinese Room argument.


Ryulightorb wrote:


nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Correction it's not possible right now.

It may be in the future consciousness like a human has is not special.

All of this is theoretical and there are many arguments for and against it.

It's stupid to simply believe it's impossible or it is possible you don't know the future or all the variables.

If it's impossible for artificial consciousness to exist then we should not exist as we are not special.

Many professionals will have their own views and theories and that's fine but it's nothing more then a theory


"May" is not a proper counterargument. In the future there "may" be pink elephants appearing and disappearing everywhere you look, along with the flying pigs they ride upon.

"It's theoretical" and "nothing more than a theory" is simply another form of "entitled to opinion" logical fallacy. I will not respond to red herring.

"Special" in exactly which way? Too much hand waving.


And still none of those reasons make what you say the truth.



Exactly how? Should I say the same "nothing what you say make what you say true" back to you?


Well I'm not claiming to know whether it's impossible or not like you are we don't have the knowledge and understanding to say if it's certain or not.

20984 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 6/8/16

nanikore2 wrote:


sena3927 wrote:

Just because artificial consciousness hasn't been created (or evolved) yet doesn't mean it's impossible.

I would agree it's impossible with conventional computers and programming. It has to be a massively parallel, very compact system... like the 100 billion neurons packed into your brain. Nothing with wires and transistors can even come close to something like it. Not even the brain of an ant (250,000 neurons) can be mimicked with conventional computer circuits. Not to mention the billions of years of evolution which lead up to such incredibly complex structures.

But brains are physical, electro-chemical structures acting in accordance with the laws of nature and thus building some sort of artificial consciousness is theoretically possible.


It not possible because whatever you build, requires programming. Once programming is there, you are locked into the Chinese Room.


So humans are in the Chinese room because we were programmed by nature in a sense.

We are beings that run off of pre made programming and function in reaction.

So we must be in the Chinese room itself
27291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 6/8/16

hemicuda2 wrote:

Artificial consciousness is impossible in the same way that flying or going to the moon was impossible. People only thought it was impossible up until the moment it was done.

At this point in time it is ignorant to claim anything impossible. If you still insist on claiming it impossible fine whatever but still try anyways because eventually you'll find out its not.

If it has happened once in nature then we can make it happen again.


You don't know how the argument worked. It's arrogant for you to turn it away without looking at its mechanics.

How do you program without a program?

The impossible is defined as a self-contradiction.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.