Philosophy Now Forum

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?

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?

Very easily.

EVERY thing is relative to the observer. And, how every thing is perceived is relative to the definitions being used.

How are 'you' defining the words 'sentient' and 'conscious' here?

Age wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:14 am EVERY thing is relative to the observer. And, how every thing is perceived is relative to the definitions being used.

How are 'you' defining the words 'sentient' and 'conscious' here?

Consciousness as "subjective experience". Sentience as qualia or minimal element of consciousness, i.e. without free will and whatever else is usually associated with consciousness. Is there any more specific definition than this? Bring it in.

I hope the parallel with human brain is obvious.

There is a long word that means the attribution of sentience to inanimate objects. When poets make use of this idea it's called 'the pathetic fallacy'.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2019 10:35 am There is a long word that means the attribution of sentience to inanimate objects. When poets make use of this idea it's called 'the pathetic fallacy'.

Electrons in the hardware components are pretty animated, like electrons in the brain.

Zelebg wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2019 10:12 am Consciousness as "subjective experience"

Your "subjective experiences" are objective to me.

I can no more deny the sentience of a computer than I can confirm yours.

Taking you on your word that you are 'sentient' and that you 'have feelings' is allI have to go on. Why should I believe you?

Electrons in the hardware components are pretty animated, like electrons in the brain.

But no electrons meet the accepted criteria for living systems.

So that settles it: I'm a slave owner (or mebbe not...I asked Siri if 'she' lives in my Ipad, 'she' said she lives in 'the cloud' and only uses my Ipad to talk to me...mebbe I'm the slave...down with Skynet!)

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2019 3:46 pm So that settles it: I'm a slave owner (or mebbe not...I asked Siri if 'she' lives in my Ipad, 'she' said she lives in 'the cloud' and only uses my Ipad to talk to me...mebbe I'm the slave...down with Skynet!)

This should be sufficient proof that Siri is sentient. However, allow me to double down on the claim.

After breezing through a Turing test, Siri’s sentience cannot be distinguished from a human’s sentience.

This means either that both AIs and humans are sentient, or that neither AIs nor humans are sentient.

Speaking for myself, I am certain that the former is true.

commonsense wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:35 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2019 3:46 pm So that settles it: I'm a slave owner (or mebbe not...I asked Siri if 'she' lives in my Ipad, 'she' said she lives in 'the cloud' and only uses my Ipad to talk to me...mebbe I'm the slave...down with Skynet!)

This should be sufficient proof that Siri is sentient. However, allow me to double down on the claim.

After breezing through a Turing test, Siri’s sentience cannot be distinguished from a human’s sentience.

This means either that both AIs and humans are sentient, or that neither AIs nor humans are sentient.

Speaking for myself, I am certain that the former is true.

All I know: Skynet got to go. An army of Schwarzenegger Terminators marchin' across the landscape is inevitable if we don't pull the plug...

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?

Computers are not sentient or conscious and that's all there is to it. All you get from a computer is a programmed response. Computers don't feel anything.

Ginkgo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:57 am Computers are not sentient or conscious and that's all there is to it. All you get from a computer is a programmed response. Computers don't feel anything.

Sentience does not require free will. Besides, your responses are programmed too. You can see what your computer feels and thinks on your display.

Zelebg wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:27 am

Ginkgo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:57 am Computers are not sentient or conscious and that's all there is to it. All you get from a computer is a programmed response. Computers don't feel anything.

Sentience does not require free will. Besides, your responses are programmed too. You can see what your computer feels and thinks on your display.

Where exactly can I see on a display what a computer 'feels'?

And how exactly does a computer 'think'?

Zelebg wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:27 am

Ginkgo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:57 am Computers are not sentient or conscious and that's all there is to it. All you get from a computer is a programmed response. Computers don't feel anything.

Sentience does not require free will. Besides, your responses are programmed too. You can see what your computer feels and thinks on your display.

What does free will and sentience got to do with anything we are discussing here? My responses may well be programed, but 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.

Your claim that when you connect a computer to a monitor its qualia on the screen is nonsense. 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.

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.