LizR wrote:
On 5 May 2015 at 16:15, Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
    I agree. In fact, I think it is a weakness of Bruno's argument that
    he starts from the "yes doctor" scenario rather than from a simple
    assumption of strong AI. The problem might be that *we* cannot have
    first person experience of being a 'strong AI being'.

Strong AI and "Yes Doctor" both follow from the assumption that consciousness is the result of computation. I have used strong AI a few times on this list in an effort to persuade people who are hung up on the feasibility of duplicating machines, pronouns and similar irrelevancies to actually address the arguments Bruno is making.

In any case, even starting from the assumption that only /human/ consciousness is computational, Bruno still reaches strong AI by about step 5.

        If you believe in Platonia, then the computation that
        instantiates the consciousness (and everyone else's
        consciousness) is a mathematical object and hence "exists"
        independent of its particular physical instantiation.  All the
        physical world is inferred from conscious experience (I find
        this dubious too) and so the computations in Platonia that
        instantiate conscious thoughts, also instantiate the physical
        world those thoughts refer to.

    Like strong AI in a virtual world. I think that is what comp is
    actually saying -- we are just that, nothing more. Whether this
    emerges from arithmetic, or is basically physical, remains
    unknowable in comp.

It can only be physical if the universe is robust. I think the ponit of comp is more that there is no /need/ to bring in the "physical hypothesis" if the UDA is correct - it becomes superfluous, since we can explain the appearance of a physical world without requiring it.

Actually, strong AI in a virtual world does not need the dovetailer or a robust universe. If one can make use of the existing physical world and the laws it displays, we do not need to extract these from arithmetic and the infinity of computations of the UD. It is the UD which is superfluous.

This is, after all, the simpler hypothesis.

Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to