Well, for one, I never said the were. You can read what I wrote as you would read, "Today, I visited the store (including the cafe)." You don't need to go to th

Well, for one, I never said the were. You can read what I wrote as you would read, "Today, I visited the store (including the cafe)." You don't need to go to the store cafe to go to the store, but you're additionally specifying you did in fact go to the store's cafe. But second, it may very well be true that emotions are necessary for GAI. The GAI probably needs to have some sort of basic instinct or drive; otherwise it'll just exhibit completely random behavior because it has no actual intentions (remember we can't explicitly program intentions for tasks, because then it's not general intelligence). The very fact that the GAI will "want" to act according its instincts/drives implies it needs some concept of satisfaction or at least desire. I think that satisfaction and desire meet most definitions of "emotion," and they can absolutely lead to emotional (as opposed to logical) behavior because any GAI is going to be basing satisfiability and desire off of heuristics, not perfect data, because the instincts/drives need to be general themselves, such that it's impossible to deterministically satisfy them. (Otherwise, the behavior degenerates into something we would recognize as non-intelligent.) I say "probably" at the start of all of that because we've never made GAI, so it's impossible to know for sure what it takes to get there. However, that model is coherent with evolution and the animal (particularly mammalian) condition. It's unclear exactly what the drives of animals are--easy guesses are survival and reproduction--but we know there are biological responses that heavily guide animal behavior. For example, we don't eat to live so much as we eat because relief from hunger is enjoyable. However, we've developed an even more abstracted response, and so most of us just kind of like to each in general, even when we're not particularly hungry. When our body can tell we're eating, it releases dopamine, which associates to a mood of well-being. This elevate mood is an emotional response; it's the high-level abstraction we use to choose our behavior. More complex decisions (involving social situations or whatnot) can just be mapped to ever-higher abstractions that are enforced through mechanisms we developed through evolution. Therefore, it can be argued that literally 100% of high-level decision making is emotional. Even if we ultimately use logic to try to make the best decision, our determination of what we want out of the "best decision" is still emotional. Even more extreme, it may be true that emotion turns out to be the definition of general intelligence, because it's at that point that the agent is making decisions in arbitrary situations based on some sort of internally consistent desire, rather than a prescriptive goal. So, the idea of a cold drone that can do everything a human can do, but doesn't feel any desire or emotion, may in fact be a contradiction. Achieving behavior that complex may not be possible (in the real world, with the data available in our plane of existence) without some emotional mechanism.