Post by general313 on Nov 11, 2017 3:45:39 GMT
2. Yes, i suspect so too, however since we've never observed an intelligence without emotions I think it is sheer speculation to suppose that they can exist separately.
2. That's because all intelligences we've observed were shaped by natural selection rather than artificial selection. Emotions are mostly the result of certain chemicals in brains, which won't be present if we're programming it artificially. Not to say we couldn't perhaps artificially replicate them in some way, but I'm not sure how that would work or what purpose it would serve. In natural selection emotions seem to be a quick short-hand in decision making, much faster than rational consideration of evidence.
It strikes me that supposing that emotions are intrinsically tied to chemicals is similar to the argument that consciousness depends on wet living matter, and that inorganic thinking machines aren't capable of consciousness. There doesn't seem to be a consensus on the latter point, so I think until we can observe more advanced machine intelligence it is premature to make statements about how much a role chemicals play in emotions. Chemicals certainly affect emotional states in our brains, since chemicals play such an important role in their basic machinery, but to separate emotional states from other mental functions on the basis of chemistry seems very unfounded to me at this point.