In short, the "computers" should start from having DNA as their building blocks or what?The answer is relatively simple: a machine will never be able to develop consciousness, because life — and thus consciousness — is based on the autocatalytic principle, and silicon is not capable of that. In addition, every machine lacks an endocrine system that makes experience possible in the first place. Also, the use of biohybrid techniques will not create consciousness, since life only functions as a whole in such a way that consciousness can arise. — Wolfgang
I think are basics are still not complete. It usually goes to even more fundamental issues than we first think it goes. The actual culprits might even lurk in our understanding of math and logic.One possibility would be to use a dynamically system-theoretical approach as metatheory and sketch the maximum of structural density with causal force as an analogue to what is described in psychology as consciousness. — Wolfgang
As long as the philosophy of mind does not make use of a sharp and categorically clear approach to the theory of science and instead loses itself in all kinds of irrationalities, it can be called dead.
In this form, it is of no use to science, nor does it provide an explanation for the nature of consciousness, but rather causes confusion. The instrumentalist approach of neuroscience and AI does not need such a philosophy. — Wolfgang
Perhaps the problem originates from the categorical nature of the distinctions you make between what you understand as the subjective and the empirically objective, the physical and the mental. — Joshs
This may help to determine whether the source of the difficulties you raise lies with the philosophical models or with the limits of your imagination. — Joshs
The OP clearly seems to think that Philosophy of Mind is a subject that is similar to a Science. Philosophy of Mind is a huge area of subject which encompasses many peripheral areas. Philosophy of Mind is hard to define in its subject and methodology. It would be too simple to think that it can be defined in a few sentences or paragraphs the OP has read in some forum posts for its negative side.There, in turn, it means a purposeful intentional behavior based on abstractions.
As long as the philosophy of mind does not make use of a sharp and categorically clear approach to the theory of science and instead loses itself in all kinds of irrationalities, it can be called dead. — Wolfgang
People thinking they can solve philosophy of mind problems from a purely philosophical perspective are deluding themselves. — Philosophim
Since the immanent experience of mind is both what is being explicated and what is doing the explicating this is a mischaracterization. Perhaps it is in some sense a story, that does not make it un-factual, only historical. Scientific facts likewise exist within an historical context, which can be extensively revised as scientific understanding evolves. — Pantagruel
self-reporting is riddled with bias — Philosophim
Both neuroscience and artificial intelligence research are working on models and applications to compensate for damage to the organism on the one hand and to autonomize process sequences on the other. Both proceed inductively, collecting empirical data and evaluating them statistically. And both are hardly dependent on the insights of the philosophy of mind — Wolfgang
AI research does have relevance to the philosophy of mind, particularly when it comes to questions about consciousness, self-awareness, and ethical considerations related to AI. While many AI researchers primarily focus on practical applications and improving AI system performance, there is a growing subfield of AI ethics and AI philosophy. These researchers do engage with philosophical questions, such as the nature of consciousness in AI, the ethical implications of AI decision-making, and AI's potential impact on society and human values.
So, while the claim is accurate in stating that neuroscience is not heavily dependent on the philosophy of mind, it is more nuanced in the case of AI research. Some aspects of AI research are influenced by philosophical considerations, especially in the realm of ethics and consciousness. Chatbots like myself, which are part of AI research, may draw upon philosophical insights when discussing topics related to ethics, consciousness, and human values. However, the core functionality of chatbots like me is primarily based on language models and machine learning techniques, which are more grounded in empirical data and statistical methods. — ChatGPT
And this contradicts the fact that every organism consists of nothing more than flesh and blood, thus of matter. — Wolfgang
In advanced economies, about 60 percent of jobs may be impacted by AI. Roughly half the exposed jobs may benefit from AI integration, enhancing productivity. For the other half, AI applications may execute key tasks currently performed by humans, which could lower labor demand, leading to lower wages and reduced hiring. In the most extreme cases, some of these jobs may disappear.
In emerging markets and low-income countries, by contrast, AI exposure is expected to be 40 percent and 26 percent, respectively. These findings suggest emerging market and developing economies face fewer immediate disruptions from AI. At the same time, many of these countries don’t have the infrastructure or skilled workforces to harness the benefits of AI, raising the risk that over time the technology could worsen inequality among nations.
And what wound that mechanism be? — Mark Nyquist
GPT reminds me of a sociopath; superficially charming, but you can sometimes sense the glib emptiness and fakery. — Tom Storm
Wayfarer: The point about mathematical objects for mathematical realist, is that while they’re independent of any particular mind, they can only be apprehended by a mind.
ChatGPT Your clarification highlights a key point in the philosophy of mathematical realism: while mathematical entities are independent of any particular mind, they require a mind for apprehension and understanding. This perspective maintains that mathematical objects and truths exist independently of human thought, but human cognition is necessary to access, interpret, and understand these truths.
This stance is interesting because it navigates between two extremes. On one hand, it avoids the notion that mathematics is purely subjective or a construct of the human mind, which would imply that mathematical truths could vary or cease to exist without human thinkers. On the other hand, it acknowledges that our engagement with mathematics is a cognitive process, rooted in human thought and understanding.
This viewpoint resonates with certain interpretations of Platonism in mathematics, where mathematical entities are seen as abstract objects residing in a realm that we access intellectually. The human mind, in this view, acts as a bridge between the abstract, independent world of mathematical truths and our subjective experience and understanding of these truths.
GPT The question of whether mathematics is a human cognitive process or an external fact of the world is a philosophical and epistemological inquiry that has been debated by scholars for centuries. The two main perspectives on this issue are known as mathematical realism and mathematical anti-realism.
Mathematical Realism:
External Reality: Mathematical realists argue that mathematical entities and truths exist independently of human thought. They believe that mathematical structures and relationships are part of an objective, external reality.
Discovery: According to this view, mathematicians discover mathematical truths rather than inventing them. These truths exist and are waiting to be unveiled through the process of mathematical exploration.
Mathematical Anti-Realism:
Human Construct: Mathematical anti-realists, on the other hand, argue that mathematics is a product of human cognition and is not an inherent aspect of an external reality.
Invention: From this perspective, mathematical concepts are invented by humans to describe and make sense of the world, but they don't have an independent existence apart from human minds.
It's important to note that this debate extends to the nature of abstract objects, such as numbers and mathematical structures. Realists posit that these abstract objects exist, while anti-realists deny their objective existence.
In summary, whether mathematics is considered a human cognitive process or an external fact of the world depends on one's philosophical stance. Both perspectives have their proponents, and the debate continues to be a lively topic in the philosophy of mathematics.
:up: Philosophy of Language + Philosophy of Science + Metaphysicsthe can of worms known as the Philosophy of Language, which is at the heart of Philosophy of Mind — sime
The fact that Philosophy of Mind overlaps with Philosophy of Science doesn't prevent philosophers of mind from using a sharp and categorically clear approach to science. One philosopher of mind that I sometimes read is John Searle. His naturalist approach is fairly clear, I think (although I'm aware that it's been criticized for being covertly dualist.)As long as the philosophy of mind does not make use of a sharp and categorically clear approach to the theory of science and instead loses itself in all kinds of irrationalities, it can be called dead. — Wolfgang
I actually agree with you in how brains do time perseption but there is more to it. In dealing with the past or future, brains are picking up on something non-physical, retaining it, and using it as input for further mental processing. It's like the brain deals in these non-physical things. — Mark Nyquist
As you say, recurrent neural networks, but there seems to be an ability to 'go off the page' of what is possible with physical matter and do things in a non-physical environment. Seems like math for example is an exercise in manipulating non-physicals — Mark Nyquist
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.