Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 23 May 2009, at 06:39, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>   
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>     
>>> On 22 May 2009, at 18:25, Jason Resch wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>       
>>>> Do you believe if we create a computer in this physical
>>>> universe that it could be made conscious,
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> But a computer is never conscious, nor is a brain. Only a person is
>>> conscious, and a computer or a brain can only make it possible for a
>>> person to be conscious relatively to another computer. So your
>>> question is ambiguous.
>>> It is not my brain which is conscious, it is me who is conscious.
>>>       
>> By "me" do you mean some computation in Platonia?  I'm wondering what
>> are the implications of your theory for creating "artificial"
>> consciousness.  Since comp starts with the assumption that replacing
>> one's brain with functionally  identical units (at some level of  
>> detail)
>> will make no discernable difference in your experience, it entails  
>> that
>> a computer that functionally replaces your brain is conscious  
>> (conscious
>> of being you in fact).  So if I want to build a conscious robot from
>> scratch, not by copying someone's brain, what must I do?
>>     
>
>
> I don't see the problem, besides the obvious and usual difficulties of  
> artificial intelligence.
> Actually if you implement a theorem prover for Peano Arithmetic (=  
> Robinson Arithmetic + the induction axioms) I am willing to say that  
> you have build a conscious entity.
>   
But why?  Why not RA without induction?  Is it necessary that there be 
infinite schema?  Since you phrase your answer as "I am willing..." is 
it a matter of your intuition or is it a matter of "degree" of 
consciousness.

Brent


> It is the entity that I interview (thanks to the work of Gödel, Löb  
> and Solovay).
> The person related to it, which I identify with the knower (obeying to  
> the theaetetical logic of "provable(p) & p")
> exist simultaneously in all the possible relative implementations of  
> it in platonia or in UD* (the universal deployment).
> I mean it is the same for a copy of me, or an intelligent robot build  
> from scratch. Both "person" exist in an atemporal and aspatial ways in  
> Platonia, and will appear concrete to any entity belonging to some  
> computation where they can manifest themselves.
> Like numbers. 17 exists in Platonia, but 17 has multiple  
> implementation in many computations in Platonia.
>
> I guess I miss something because I don't see any problem here. You may  
> elaborate perhaps. We are in the seven step here. Are you sure you  
> grasp the six preceding steps?
>
> Bruno
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>
> >
>
>   


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to