I don't think AGI workers have ever promised consciousness - just
intelligence.  In fact for many purposes consciousness would be
as an unacceptable attribute (c.f. John McCarthy

The AGI movement has been promising human level intellect for decades.
The link to the necessity for consciousness is easy to see ... That
COMP clerics like McCarthy must adopt a presupposition that _general_
intellect (human kind) can operate without consciousness, when the
only example of general intellect we have, humans, has exactly that,
seems rather odd. (Scientific) observation is _literally_ (mostly
visual) P-consciousness. Take it away and you have no (scientific)
observation, no learning, no adaptation = No general intelligence.
Seems rather straightforward to me. Like everyone else in this
religion, there's a presupposition that COMP is true.

Now say "humans are conscious? Prove it."
To which I say "COMP is true? Prove it"
Been around this loop many times. :-)

If McCarthy says consciousness is not a necessary condition for
general intelligence, when you can empirically prove, in the only
example we have, humans, that interfering with it  (eg TMS or TES)
kills/degrades it ....  is surely an act of blind faith in COMP. As

I told you I'd be going after this faith-based nonsense! My next
volley is in June?ish when my paper comes out "On the status of
computationalism as a law of nature". It ends up siding with Maudlin
but by a very different route that has nothing to do with Turing
machines. Interestingly, my paper does confirm that COMP is trivially
true, but only in the sense that if you already know everything (for
your program on the tape to be created), you can COMP the lot. It's
COMPing the _unknown_ that is the problem. In Maudlins paper the
'unknowns' are the 'counterfactual water-troughs' of the uber/mega
Olympia. Same thing.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to