3 ms·
I and many others strongly disagree with the statement’s assumption that infants are not conscious, so it’s not a completely uncontroversial statement. Sure,
by lfpeb8b45ez 4y ago
I and many others strongly disagree with the statement’s assumption that infants are not conscious, so it’s not a completely uncontroversial statement. Sure, they have very limited I/O, but I understand that as orthagonal to consciousness.
- mgraczyk 4y agoReplace "infant" with fetus then...
- lfpeb8b45ez 4y agoStill not uncontroversial: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31922622/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31922622/
- mgraczyk 4y agoIt's obviously not controversial. Your linked article doesn't claim that a 0-week old Fetus is conscious. It claims you can define consciousness in such a way that a 24 week old fetus is conscious. That 100% completely reinforces my point, which is that we are in agreement that a 0-week fetus moves toward consciousness (your article claims it achieves it by 24 weeks). We are able to agree on that without agreeing on the definition of consciousness, so the lack of a unanimous definition doesn't prevent us from pointing at AI and saying "this is moving toward consciousness".