"Feelings" are instantiated in biochemical systems but this does not preclude them being instantiated other inorganic systems. — 180 Proof
This doesn't follow. "Feelings" are instantiated in biochemical systems but this does not preclude them being instantiated other inorganic systems. Furthermore, in principle nothing precludes "AI" from being manifested through biochemical systems (via e.g. neuro-augmentation or symbiosis). — 180 Proof
If people mistreat life-like robots or AI they are (to an extent) toying with doing so to real humans — Isaac
I think the eventual availability of high-fidelity graphic-emotive VR simulators of rape, torture & murder (plus offline prescription medications, etc) will greatly reduce the incidents of victimizing real persons by antisocial psychopaths. — 180 Proof
We ought not be the sort of people who can hear cries of distress and not feel like we should respond. — Isaac
I think the eventual availability of high-fidelity graphic-emotive VR simulators of rape, torture & murder (plus offline prescription medications, etc) will greatly reduce the incidents of victimizing real persons by antisocial psychopaths. — 180 Proof
a virtual simulation of distress - that is to say, twice-removed from actual distress. The human mind is able to cope with, manage, such nuances and remain completely healthy. — ZzzoneiroCosm
That's the conclusion, not the evidence. — Isaac
I think it would be only too easy to induce ataraxia by producing two counter-papers — ZzzoneiroCosm
I think the minds of children should be protected from simulations of violence. And possibly some set of adult minds. But on minds like mine it has no detrimental effect. — ZzzoneiroCosm
:up:You're right, of course, on both points but I imagine those potentialities are distant-future. — ZzzoneiroCosm
In which case, how can it make sense to draw context-independent conclusions about whether or not the architecture has achieved understanding? An understanding of what in relation to whom? — sime
If people mistreat life-like robots or AI they are (to an extent) toying with doing so to real humans. There's several parts of the brain involved in moral decision-making which do not consult much with anywhere capable of distinguishing a clever AI from a real person. We ought not be training our systems how to ignore that output. — Isaac
What this discussion shows is that as soon as an observable criteria for consciousness is set out a clever programer will be able to "simulate" it.
It follows that no observable criteria will ever be sufficient.
But of course "phenomenal experience" can only be observed by the observer, and so cannot serve as a criteria for attributing consciousness.
So this line of thought does not get anywhere.
Whether some piece of software is conscious is not a technical question. — Banno
So we could then ask the question of how we ought act in the face of such uncertainty. Is it worth the risk? What are the costs either way? That kind of analysis can be done, no? — Isaac
"Thought crime" as a prohibition has a very long history of failure and pathologization in countless societies. — 180 Proof
it would, in truth, be horrific to adjudicate moral reasoning to a bureaucratic establishment dedicated to producing knowledge, issuing certificates of analysis on each robot, alien, or person that they qualify. — Moliere
...had no doubt that the Case of Slaves was the same as if Horses had been thrown over board
In line with Richard Dreyfus's criticisms of computer science in the seventies that predicted the failure of symbolic AI, AI research continues to be overly fixated upon cognitive structure, representations and algorithms, due to western culture's ongoing cartesian prejudices that continue to falsely attribute properties, such as semantic understanding, or the ability to complete a task, to learning algorithms and cognitive architectures per-se, as opposed to the wider situational factors that subsume the interactions of machines with their environments, that includes the non-cognitive physical processes that mediate such interactions. — sime
I think the key factor in cases like slavery is that we do not start from a limited group of 'moral subjects' and gradually expand it. We start with everything that seems like a moral subject included and we gradually reduce it. — Isaac
No, I'd say it's far more sensible to err on the side of caution, because of who we will become if we do not. — Moliere
Curious to me that those who have no use for the word 'subjectivity' prefer not to draw a line between creatures and machines. Thoughts? — ZzzoneiroCosm
'forgetfulness of being'. — Wayfarer
Heidegger's inspiration. Haven't read enough of him. — ZzzoneiroCosm
Oh, you mean it's not objective! So that's it. No wonder, then.subjectivity is not open to our inspection — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.