|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Nov 12, 2017 0:10:44 GMT
I wasn't suggesting that emotions must be tied to chemicals--I did say "(we could perhaps) artificially replicate them in some way"--merely that I don't know what the purpose of doing so would be if we're trying to devise a machine with advanced thinking/problem-solving skills. I'm pretty agnostic on the whole "consciousness" business because I think the term is so loaded that there's not even a consensus on what consciousness really is, much less whether inorganic machines would be capable of it. I most heartedly agree with that. If I were to place a bet though, I'd put it on inorganic machines would be capable of it. I do wonder if we'll ever understand conciousness well enough to really have any certainty that an advanced AI was conscious. As I understand it, the biggest problem with consciousness is that it's mostly (not universally, perhaps, but mostly) defined as a purely subjective phenomena: ie, what we actually experience when we see the color red, as opposed to understanding the machinery that goes into allowing us to see the color (photons, eyes, the wiring of the visual cortex, etc.). If you replicate the machinery of sight, but that machinery exists in a different medium/substrate, will that seeing-thing still experience red in the same way? Perhaps the only way we might could ever know this would be if a human could actually have part of their brains replaced by the same stuff as AIs and were then able to report on whether there was any difference in their conscious experiences before and after. |
|
