You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Turing Test and Machine Intelligence (part II)

in StemSocial2 years ago

Since consciousness is an inherently private thing, I doubt it can be detected using the traditional ways we use in science to investigate matter.

Yeah, your take on consciousness is similar to solipsism. On the other hand, while it is true that some organisms, such as cockroaches and amoebas, can have a level of awareness of their environment that can even trigger an apparent "panic attack", I think that is still different from being conscious. I am more inclined to think like David Wallace: consciousness seems mysterious because it is complicated and we have not yet understood it fully, but it is still a physical process and we should not need special theories to explain it.

You get the point. It's sci fi stuff, but I can't see why, in principle, it couldn't work and, more importantly, I can't see what else could work!

Yes, what we don't know is whether that conscious machine can be based on discrete states and algorithms. Turing had already imagined that creating a conscious artificial being of some kind must be possible since we exist, we are the living example. The problem is what should be the minimal nature of that machine. Our brain is analogical and we don't know yet if thinking is computational. Maybe that is the limit or maybe not.

Thanks for the discussion!