> From: Richard Loosemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I thought what he said was a good description more or less. Out of > 600 > > millions years there may be only a fraction of that which is an > improvement > > but it's still there. > > > > How do you know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that any other being is > > conscious? > > The problem is, you have to nail down exactly what you *mean* by the > word "conscious" before you start asking questions or making > statements. > Once you start reading about and thinking about all the attempts that > have been made to get specific about it, some interesting new answers > to > simple questions like this begin to emerge. > > What I am fighting here is a tendency for some people to use > wave-of-the-hand definitions that only capture a fraction of a percent > of the real meaning of the term. And sometimes not even that. >
I see consciousness as a handle to a system. Consciousness is and is not a unit. Being a system it has components. And the word consciousness may be semi-inclusive or over-inclusive. As well consciousness can be descripted as an ether type thing also but consciousness as a system is more applicable here I think. I would be interested in how one goes about proving that another being is conscious. I can imagine definitions of consciousness that would prove that. Somehow though the mystery is worthy of perpetuation. > One of the main conclusions of the paper I am writing now is that you > will (almost certainly) have no choice in the matter, because a > sufficiently powerful type of AGI will be conscious whether you like it > or not. > Uhm what is sufficiently mean here? Consciousness may require some intelligence but I think that intelligence need only possess absolute minimalistic consciousness. Definitions, definitions. Is there someone who has come up with a consciousness system described quantitatively instead of just fussy word descriptions? > The question of "slavery" is completely orthogonal. Yes and no. It's related. > > I just want things to be taken care of and no issues. Consciousness > brings > > issues. Intelligence and consciousness are separate. > > > > Back to my first paragraph above: until you have thought carefully > about what you mean by consciousness, and have figured out where it > comes from, you can't really make a definitive statement like that, > surely? > Have deeply thought about it. They are not mutually exclusive nor mostly the same. With both I assume calculations involving resource processing and space time dynamics. Consciousness needs to be broken up into different kinds of consciousness with interrelatedness between. Intelligence has less complexity than consciousness. It is a semi-system. Consciousness can be evoked using intelligence. Intelligence can be spurred with consciousness. They both interoperate but intelligence can be distilled out of an existing conscio-intelligence. And they can facilitate each other yet hinder each other. We'd really have to get into the math to get commitant on it. > And besides, the wanting to have things taken care of bit is a separate > issue. That is not a problem, either way. Heh. John ------------------------------------------- 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=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
