No, I mean that the objective-subjective distinction does not help. — Banno
Are you claiming that LaMDA does not have a subjective life, but that you do, and yet that this mooted subjective life is not observable by anyone but the subject? — Banno
Empirically speaking, the only instances of conscious life thatcanhave be observed are living organisms, — Wayfarer
The chief danger in life is that you will take too many precautions. — Adler
which exhibit conscious activity — Wayfarer
there's no reason to believe that there is anything to prove — Wayfarer
On the other hand: there is no other approach to the subjective short of assuming all things - viruses, amoebae, flowers, rocks, machines, sofas, tables - are sentient — ZzzoneiroCosm
What religious belief? Haven't said anything about religion in this entire thread. — Wayfarer
A definition, not a fact.If Wayfarer is what I am - a human being - if Wayfarer is a human being - Wayfarer has subjective experiences, Wayfarer is sentient. — ZzzoneiroCosm
In the same way, I suppose, you also bear the burden to support the claim – assumption – that you are sentient.If someone says a machine might be sentient - might have subjective experiences - the burden is on him to support that claim.
"Different from what one is" in what way?The case with animals - with anything different from what one is - a human being - is similar to the case of a machine
Does your sofa seem sentient? — Isaac
Has anyone interacting with it come away with the impression that it's sentient? — Isaac
In the same way, I suppose, you also bear the burden to support the claim – assumption – that you are sentient. — 180 Proof
"Different from what one is" in what way? — 180 Proof
It seems the burden is on you, Zzz, to support the claim the "animals" are sufficiently "different from" humans with respect to subjectivity (sentience). — 180 Proof
So when a "machine" expresses I am sentient, yet cannot fulfill its burden to prove that claim, we haven't anymore grounds to doubt it's claim to "sentience", ceteris paribus, as we do to doubt a human who fails to meet her burden, no? :monkey: — 180 Proof
Non sequitur.There is no universal assumption of solipsism that I bear the burden of refuting. — ZzzoneiroCosm
Strawman & burden-shifting.Unless you want to deny the significance of a specie-al distinction.
Appeal to ignorance.No, because if they're not seen as sufficiently different then we can suppose they're sentient like me.
Circular reasoning.Yes, we always have grounds to doubt a machine is sentient by the very fact that it's a machine.
Yes, we always have grounds to doubt a machine is sentient by the very fact that it's a machine.
Circular reasoning — 180 Proof
Just curious - a ridiculous hypothetical. If a spaceship landed on the White House lawn tomorrow, and slimy, tentacled (clearly organic) entities emerged demanding trade goods (and ice cream), would you insist it was their burden to prove their sentience? — Real Gone Cat
My only knowledge of you are words on a screen. Why should I accept your claims of sentience, but not LaMDA's? — Real Gone Cat
Is sentience judged by appearance or behavior? — Real Gone Cat
If one judges LaMDA to be intelligent, that is. — Real Gone Cat
Anyone making an extraordinary claim about anything bears the burden of proof — 180 Proof
I would treat them as I would any other seemingly intelligent creature. — ZzzoneiroCosm
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.