Re: How Robots Will Steal Your Job

Roedy Green wrote:


---------------------- Nope, I can make a doll complain of pain or wriggle. I can further program a robot to complain appropriately when hurt, but both those are distinctly different from an entity which actually experiences it, a Consciousness.

--------------------------- Nonsense. Without cause. Animism is a defective superstition for good reasons.

----------------------------- You never "feel" unconscious.

-------------------------------- Yup. AND things that don't react like a Conscious entity does! Steve
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote or quoted :

It all comes down to this. I know I am conscious. I don't know anything else is. I will make a presumption based on how similar they are to me.
I could make a case that I, Roedy Green, am the only conscious being on earth. I can think of no experiment that could disprove that to me.
I could make a case that all awake humans are conscious, with a few exceptions like Britney Spears.
I could make a case that all cuddly animals are also conscious.
I could decide that all animals are conscious.
I could decide that all living things are conscious.
I could decide that all things describable by a Shrodinger wave equation are conscious.
Since we have no machine to measure consciousness, it comes down to a matter of taste, your bleeding heart quotient.
In the end, what difference does it make? It is an ethical thing. Do I try to avoid hurting mosquitos? Some Jains and Buddhist monks do. I suspect they may be conscious, and enjoy swatting them anyway. I want them to suffer for annoying me.
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 07:41:27 GMT, Roedy Green

You can pile ridicule on someone who asserts one of these, but what experiment could you propose to disprove their assertion?
The Hare Krishna sect even believes that statues of the deity are conscious. I can't think of way to talk them out of it.
Keep in mind humans have reported that if the are given curare, they remain conscious, though totally paralysed. So reaction to stimuli is not a sure fire indicator of consciousness.
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roedy Green wrote:

----------------- But that's not because they're right, but because they're stupid. It has nothing to do with any kind of proof anyway!

---------------------- No, their reports later are. Awareness is the Continuity Memory of Self-referenced Self-Existence.
Fetuses aren't, because they haven't been yet. We abort them at will.
But comatose elders may be, because they have been and thus may be again! Thus we preserve them, though unconscious, as we do sleeping and anaesthetized persons.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
message <snip>

Really? I just euthanize them quickly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:42:20 +0000, George W. Cherry wrote:
is it something as simple as the ability to survive?
is everything else the icing on the cake, is it taste rather than intelligence?
i mean, look at the sort of art some people will pay millions for, tracey emmen stuff etc. They must surely be dumb as muck.....
But is the pretending to like (or actually beleiving you do like) something that someone more important likes intelligent? with a view to being accepted by that superior?
1984
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roedy Green wrote:

--------------------------- Sure. Fine. The thing is, that you could be fooled for a finite time that MIGHT exceed your longevity.

------------------------------ Sure. But others might regard you as obtuse.

-------------------- Tee-hee.
---------------------------------- If you continued to be obtuse you COULD insist that, but others who are more rational and reasonable might disagree, and you'd be a fool, unbeknownst to you. You can always take your marbles and go home, but then you don't get to play with others.
We don't need some "machine" to measure consciousness, we need only look at how the entity functions, and how likely it is that Nature would be able to cram a much higher overhead PLD version of an only emulated awareness into a brain-sized container, than it managed the SelfAware engine in your same sized brain made of the same material as the other guy.

-------------------------- Now you're merely equivocating, also lame. It WOULD be, if you could decide.

------------------------------------ Me too, they deserve it. But that's merely wishful play.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Would it matter? Think about it.

What others? Did you actually understand Roedy's (rather simple) statement?
Look up "solipsism."
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Alan Balmer wrote:

------------------------ If you died, in some sense it would cease to, but that's NOT the sense in which I meant it.

-------------------------- I know what solipsism is, and have for many decades.
Don't you merely smirk and posture at us instead of think.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Then it should be obvious that if Roedy Green is the only conscious being on earth, there *are* no "others" to regard him as obtuse.
If you mean that others might think him obtuse for making the argument, you must regard as obtuse a number of well-known and respected thinkers which you have undoubtedly encountered in your decades of philosophical study.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Alan Balmer wrote:

Solipsism is the theory or view that the self is the only reality. Self is the consciousness of one's own being or identity, i.e. self-awareness. It does not preclude the "self" of others, however a sociopath might view themselves as the only conscious being on the earth, at least the only being that matters. No offense intended to anyone, just making the point that an awareness of Self is a critical part of intelligence.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joseph Dionne wrote:

---------------- Solipsism is classically defined as precisely the sociopathic view.
I prefer a Multipsism or Omnipsism.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote or quoted :

It is obvious to YOU that I am not, but not "obvious" to me.
However, try to imagine an experiment that would conclusively prove to that YOU are not the only conscious being in the universe. I actually spent a day in 1974 seriously pondering this. It appeared to be so. I concluded that I could not tell one way or the other, and it was far more comfortable to presume I was not alone, so I would return to that presumption.
We hold deep-seated opinions on consciousness, but they are based on AIR. That is why we defend them with such vigorous rounds of ad hominem. We have nothing else.
You might try with an argument against solipsism like this:
I appear to be like every other being. Why should I be any different in consciousness since I appear nearly identical in all respects like others? I am clearly wiser and free of false opinions, but what has that to do with consciousness?
You might then conclude that other humans are conscious too.
Just how "identical" you consider yourself to a chimp (98% same genes), a firefly, or an amoeba or a rock determines where you assign consciousness. How wide you cast your net is a matter of ego and religious upbringing, namely how special do you think you are.
We desperately need something to measure consciousness that correlates with subjective measures of human consciousness. Then we would have something a little more concrete to go on.
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
message

Much of this argument melts away when one realizes that consciousness is not a binary condition, but states_of along a spectrum. Degree of, or completeness_of, or sopphistication_of consciousness would be a more appropriate way of measuring and comparing.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:18:30 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"

There are actually two kinds of consciousness, consciousness of something and consciousness without an object.
Consider what would it be like to be deaf and blind. Clearly your consciousness OF things is degraded. However, you could still have an acute sense of beingness, of presence, that would exceed someone hypnotised in front of a TV set.
Perhaps consciousness without an object is really just consciousness of internal thought processes, though many people would say otherwise. Many people attest there is a blissful state of consciousness without thoughts. You deliberately stem the random flow of sporadic thoughts.
Then there is cosmic consciousness which I write about a bit on my website in various essays such as http://mindprod.com/ccism.html . I think this is much more common than people let on. They don't want to talk about it to avoid being labelled crazy. Further it may only happen a few times in a lifetime. Finally it is so hard to say anything sensible about it because it is so different from ordinary consciousness.
It leads me to speculate there many be many other sorts of consciousness very different from our ordinary waking consciousness.
"It is that our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we call it, is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all completeness, definite types of mentality which probably somewhere have their field of application and adaptation. No account of the universe in its totality can be final which leaves these other forms of consciousness quite disregarded. How to regard them is the question for they are so discontinuous with ordinary consciousness. Yet they may determine attitudes though they cannot furnish formulas, and open a region through which they fail to give a map. At any rate, they forbid a premature closing of our accounts with reality." ~William James
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roedy Green wrote:

--------------------------------- Consciousness is its OWN "object" that makes it consciousness.

---------------------------------- Loss of senses is not unconscoousness.

------------------------------- All ideas are "internal", and so is the whole world you experience. There is no "internal", that is merely you claiming your you-ness as yours, an idea thinking it exists.

---------------------------------------- Sort of. Not quite. Ideas about ideas...

--------------------------------- And yet it isn't. It's always there, behind ideas of possession.

[]
------------------------- Eh, not really.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
message wrote or quoted :

not
Are you familiar with Franklin Merrill-Wolff's work: "The Philosophy of Consciousness Without an Object" and prior and subsequent works?
A western mind's approach to the perennial eastern religion's take on just this topic. He was a mathematician at Princeton and had an experience of pure CWO, thence CWO/Subject.
I uge all interested in studies of C to read the works because no study of consciousness within science can ignore what he is saying and be complete.

The practice of meditation (jnana yoga, kriya joga, hatha joga, etc.) are all paths to that ineffable "state". FIrst learn to focus on some *thing*. THen learn to focus on the light of consciousness that illuminates that thing. Pure awareness/C without the object. Then too, sublimley dissolve that self which is looking and become identical with the Self (notice init. caps.).
The aphorisms in FMW's books are priceless.
"Before object were, consciousness without an object is"
"When awareness cognizes Time, then knowledge of Timelessness if born."
and 54 more...
OM TAT SAT

No -I understand completely what you are saying!! I have been studying in theat area since 1981 and met Merrill-Wolff.

Of course; hypnotic states, drug-induced states (a myriad), dreaming states,

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote or quoted :

And you keep stating the reverse, similarly for no reason at all. I think we are going around in circles.
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roedy Green wrote:

-------------------- Mischaracterization. You have no reasons, but I do indeed. Animals don't have our capabilities, they manifest no self-awareness in interactions with us. You continue to pretend that their platform is unimportant, and that an awareness must surely "ride" it, as we do ours, which is unreasonable given their responses. If what you suggest was so, they would be aware of our superiority and wish to gain our attention to their plight. Instead what they DO manifest, and obviously so, is that they have NO such concerns, have NO "ideas" as we do, no abstraction, and how one would even do anything that could be alleged to be thinking without abstraction is unworth even considering seriously. To believe such a thing you would have to be untutored in what "abtraction" EVEN MEANS, or be so dense as to have never actually given real consideration to philosophical concepts.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz snipped-for-privacy@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote or quoted :

You have not yet demonstrated any argument that self awareness has anything to do with consciousness. Self awareness sounds a bit like a high fallutin concept that perhaps even some humans don't have. Consciousness is very simple and requires no philosophical sophistication. Do you FEEL or not? I can feel even when I am half asleep. The test for self awareness is recognising a reflection as yourself in the mirror, right? Can babies do this? Are babies conscious?
By the way, I am arguing for agnosticism. I don't think we have enough data to decide.
To me your argument sounds like this: Only humans are conscious because only humans can do trigonometry. If humans are unique in one respect they must be unique in all respects.
-- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.