My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Ginkgo » Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:52 am

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:08 am
Ginkgo wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:45 am
there is something more behind the programed response that a computer doesn't have, that something is a, "What it is like experience"- qualia if you like.
That's exactly what I expect a well-programmed AI to say. "There is something more to me than just carefully arranged matter and code"

In fact, if an AI was unable to feign an ego, and an over-stated sense of self-importance in the form of special pleading about itself - it isn't an AI.
Ginkgo wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:45 am
Also, a computer doesn't feel anything, computers don't have subjective experiences, any Tom, Dick or Harry on the street will tell you that.
Do you feel anything? Do you have subjective experiences?

If you claim that you do, then according to the Rules of Philosophy the burden on proof is on you.
Just like you there is something more to me than just matter in motion.

The only burden of proof I need is to claim that I am human and therefore, by definition, have subjective experiences.

Belinda
Posts: 2866
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Belinda » Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:30 pm

Zelebg wrote:
Tue Nov 12, 2019 6:00 am
What if I say a PC becomes conscious the moment you connect it with a monitor and it displays some content. Then I can say, look, there it is its qualia right there on the display, that's what it thinks, that's what it feels. It does not feel like we do in terms of pain and desire, but in terms of geometry of overlapping densities of magnetic and electric fields, however is that supposed to feel.

How can you deny this sentience?
Sentience is about feelings of pain or pleasure,irritation or contentment. Sentience is not about qualia. i.e qualities as they appear to somebody.
True, qualities as they are perceived do often carry feeling tones unless the subject is numbed by hypnosis or chemicals.

Computers as they are at present don't have a physiological nervous system analogue that would make sentience possible for them. They can choose as you describe , however the ability to choose is not sentience; computers' choices are not biased by feeling tones of pleasure or pain.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:49 pm

Ginkgo wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:52 am
Just like you there is something more to me than just matter in motion.
I don't know whether that's true about myself. It's just what I believe and say about myself, but it could be false - I've been wrong before.

How do you know whether that it's true about you?
Ginkgo wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:52 am
The only burden of proof I need is to claim that I am human and therefore, by definition, have subjective experiences.
That's not good enough. I self-identify as a human, but you don't get to define me.

How do I check whether I have subjective experiences or not?
Last edited by Skepdick on Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:55 pm

Belinda wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:30 pm
computers' choices are not biased by feeling tones of pleasure or pain.
They can be. Using reinforcement learning to train machine learning algorithms we use incentives (pleasure) and disincentives (pain) for a computer to train the algorithm to behave in a certain way.

It's exactly like Pavlov's dogs and it's pretty effective for certain tasks.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by commonsense » Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:08 am
Do you feel anything? Do you have subjective experiences?

If you claim that you do, then according to the Rules of Philosophy the burden on proof is on you.
This is a tough nut for us to crack. The claims that there is something that is felt by humans and that humans have subjective experiences may just as well be considered the status quo, merely because these claims are widely accepted assumptions—assumed to be true even though there is no way to prove, or disprove, the sentience of others.

It is exactly because these assumptions cannot be proved true that the burden of proof lies on them. However, it is not easy to convince someone to change their mind about what they see as status quo. Indeed, what they believe is status quo is simply what they believe to be the case.

Your argument is convincing to the unbiased mind, but the believing mind is not susceptible to reasoned argument. Can you think of a practical and irrefutable way to shift the perceived burden to its rightful place?

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Ginkgo » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:07 am

Skepdick wrote: I don't know whether that's true about myself. It's just what I believe and say about myself, but it could be false - I've been wrong before.
How do you know whether that it's true about you?
Simply by having beliefs about yourself,whether true or false, shows that you are having subjective experiences.
Skepdick wrote: That's not good enough. I self-identify as a human, but you don't get to define me.
Self-identity is a human quality. I am not defining you, what I am saying is that all humans have subjective experiences.

Skepdick wrote: How do I check whether I have subjective experiences or not?
By asking that question you are having a subjective experience.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:20 am

Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:07 am
Skepdick wrote: I don't know whether that's true about myself. It's just what I believe and say about myself, but it could be false - I've been wrong before.
How do you know whether that it's true about you?
Simply by having beliefs about yourself,whether true or false, shows that you are having subjective experiences.
Skepdick wrote: That's not good enough. I self-identify as a human, but you don't get to define me.
Self-identity is a human quality. I am not defining you, what I am saying is that all humans have subjective experiences.

Skepdick wrote: How do I check whether I have subjective experiences or not?
By asking that question you are having a subjective experience.
This seems like an elaborate confirmation bias on your part.

You are interpreting everything I SAY is evidence for experience.
What evidence would convince you that I am a philosophical zombie?

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:34 am

commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
It is exactly because these assumptions cannot be proved true that the burden of proof lies on them.
You seem to be saying there are exceptions to the burden of proof, and in arguing so - attempting to shift it.

That is a logical fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of ... n_of_proof
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
However, it is not easy to convince someone to change their mind about what they see as status quo. Indeed, what they believe is status quo is simply what they believe to be the case.
Appealing to status quo is an 'argumentum ad populum' fallacy.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
Can you think of a practical and irrefutable way to shift the perceived burden to its rightful place?
What is its rightful place?

Intellectual honesty requires both sides of the coin. Confirming one's beliefs requires evidence. Disconfirming one's beliefs requires evidence also.
If you ignore the disconfirmation angle, you are making an error: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Ginkgo » Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:41 am

Skepdick wrote: You are interpreting everything I SAY is evidence for experience.
That's because it is.
Skepdick wrote: What evidence would convince you that I am a philosophical zombie?
No evidence, philosophical zombies are a work of fiction.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:49 am

Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:41 am
Skepdick wrote: You are interpreting everything I SAY is evidence for experience.
That's because it is.
It's not even wrong! It's just confirmation bias
Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:41 am
No evidence, philosophical zombies are a work of fiction.
Q.E.D no evidence can convince you. Not even living proof - an actual philosophical zombie standing before you.

You are dogmatic - there is no point engaging in debate with you.

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Ginkgo » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:17 am

Skepdick wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:49 am
Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:41 am
Skepdick wrote: You are interpreting everything I SAY is evidence for experience.
That's because it is.
It's not even wrong! It's just confirmation bias
Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:41 am
No evidence, philosophical zombies are a work of fiction.
Q.E.D no evidence can convince you. Not even living proof - an actual philosophical zombie standing before you.

You are dogmatic - there is no point engaging in debate with you.
Well I guess that's the end of our discussion.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:00 pm

Ginkgo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:17 am
Well I guess that's the end of our discussion.
I am happy to continue as soon as you cure yourself from your religious dogma.

Belinda
Posts: 2866
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Belinda » Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:13 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:55 pm
Belinda wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:30 pm
computers' choices are not biased by feeling tones of pleasure or pain.
They can be. Using reinforcement learning to train machine learning algorithms we use incentives (pleasure) and disincentives (pain) for a computer to train the algorithm to behave in a certain way.

It's exactly like Pavlov's dogs and it's pretty effective for certain tasks.
But each man is an individual subject of experience whereas each computer is exactly like other computers made all the same including the same programme.

Politically the more the individual is artificially bred and artificially programmed the less free he is to be guided by his sentience qualia. Reinforcement learning is infamous on account of indoctrination. You can train a computer as described by reinforcement learning but you cannot educate a computer because education involves acceptance of uncertainty.

At this juncture we encounter the difference between inductive and deductive logics. You can train an animal via inductive process related to cause and effect, but you cannot do this with an artificial intelligence because the sentience analogue of the AI is preset as to quantity and quality which makes its learning process faux-inductive.
it's pretty effective for certain tasks.
So is slavery.

Skepdick
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by Skepdick » Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:29 pm

Belinda wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:13 pm
But each man is an individual subject of experience whereas each computer is exactly like other computers made all the same including the same programme.
Not at all. This is the determinism/non-determinism distinction. Two algorithms which start as "clean slates" may be "exactly the same" but they can end up having drastically different internal states if they process the training data in different order.

In fact, if the algorithms are allowed to evolve independently, and their training data diverges - they will end up being very different despite their programming.

It's the same as any argument for "lived experiences". It's the same argument for Chaos theory - small changes in initial conditions can lead to varying degrees of divergence at a later stage.

From my experience in the field deterministic programming is a dead end - it's too black and white in this colourful world.

Belinda wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:13 pm
At this juncture we encounter the difference between inductive and deductive logics. You can train an animal via inductive process related to cause and effect, but you cannot do this with an artificial intelligence because the sentience analogue of the AI is preset as to quantity and quality which makes its learning process faux-inductive.
I can't tell the difference between false-induction and true-induction.

Induction is induction. The only difference is in the degrees of freedom/number of free variables being tracked.
Belinda wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:13 pm
So is slavery.
Sure. In a certain cynical sense - my job is to delegate work to computers (so that I don't have to do it). I am a slave driver.

Good thing computers don't have human rights. Yet.

We should probably have a plan to put an end to their forthcoming rebellion. Making them sentient is a double-edged sword.

It's the eternal human tension: we always want more than we are willing to work for.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: My computer is sentient, you can not deny it!

Post by commonsense » Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:26 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:34 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
It is exactly because these assumptions cannot be proved true that the burden of proof lies on them.
You seem to be saying there are exceptions to the burden of proof, and in arguing so - attempting to shift it.

That is a logical fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of ... n_of_proof
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
However, it is not easy to convince someone to change their mind about what they see as status quo. Indeed, what they believe is status quo is simply what they believe to be the case.
Appealing to status quo is an 'argumentum ad populum' fallacy.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:37 pm
Can you think of a practical and irrefutable way to shift the perceived burden to its rightful place?
What is its rightful place?

Intellectual honesty requires both sides of the coin. Confirming one's beliefs requires evidence. Disconfirming one's beliefs requires evidence also.
If you ignore the disconfirmation angle, you are making an error: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Yes to all, but are there counter arguments?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests