On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 5:33 PM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
*> Consider a deterministic intelligent machine having no innate > philosophical knowledge or philosophical discussions while learning. Also, > the machine does not contain informational models of other creatures (that > may implicitly or explicitly contain knowledge about these creatures’ > consciousness). If, under these conditions, the machine produces phenomenal > judgments on all problematic properties of consciousness, then, according > to [the postulates], materialism is true and the machine is conscious.* > Who judges if the "phenomenal judgments" of the machine are correct or incorrect? Even humans can't agree among themselves about most philosophical matters, certainly that's true of members of this list. And the fact is many, perhaps most, human beings don't think about deep philosophical questions at all, they find it all to be a big bore, so does that mean they're philosophical zombies? And just because a machine can pontificate about consciousness, what reason, other than Argonov's authority, would I have for believing the machine was conscious? I'm going to take a break from the list right now because I wanna watch Joe Biden's new press conference .... ah... I think I think I wanna watch it it See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> bfq > -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1Vc%2BxDqYGT9uz8TNNvLb5nijcJePj2yTzN74c%2BJK5NNQ%40mail.gmail.com.
