Matt Mahoney wrote:
--- On Mon, 11/10/08, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do you agree that there is no test to distinguish a
conscious human from a philosophical zombie, thus no way to
establish whether zombies exist?
Disagree.
What test would you use?
The test will be published in the next couple of months in the Open AI
journal.
= An objective test for "scientific behaviour". I call it the 'PCST' for
P-Conscious Scientist Test.
You can't be a scientist without being visually P-conscious to
experience your evidence.
You can't deny the test without declaring scientists devoid of
consciousness whilst demanding it be used for all scientific evidence in
a verifiable way AND whilst investing in an entire science paradigm
"Neural Correlates of Consciousness" dedicated to scientific exploration
of P-consciousness....The logic's pretty good and it's easy to design an
objective test demanding delivery of a 'law of nature'. The execution,
however, is logistically difficult++. BUT...At least it's doable. A hard
test is better than no test at all, which is what we currently have.
When it comes out I'll let you know.
RE ETHICS......I say this in the paper:
"As was recognised by Gamez [35], one cannot help but notice that there
is also a secondary ethical 'bootstrap' process. Once a single subject
passes the PCST, for the first time ever in certain circumstances there
will be a valid scientific reason obliging all scientists to consider
the internal life of an artefact as potentially having some level of
equivalence to that of a laboratory animal, possibly deserving of
similar ethical treatment. Until that event occurs, however, all such
discussions are best considered moot."
cheers
colin
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
