4 ms·
>You can come study the behavior of any arbitrary system, given certain inputs and outputs, and assign any meaning you want to its states. You can retro-fit any
by simonh 4y ago
>You can come study the behavior of any arbitrary system, given certain inputs and outputs, and assign any meaning you want to its states. You can retro-fit any intepretation of state to the system.
All you are saying here is that no external interpretation of a system can experience the consciousness of a system, if it is conscious. Yes, that is correct. No matter how thoroughly I scan and analyse your brain state I can't use that to demonstrate your internal experience, so why would we expect that to be true of any other form of consciousness?
I'm going out of sequence with your comment here but:
>But you have to understand, a system inspecting its own state is not any different from a system inspecting any other arbitrary state. For the state of the system will be encoded in some way that was chosen arbitrarily. There's nothing essential about any encoding of any state that can possibly give raise to a phenomenon like consciousness.
I don't see how you can possibly demonstrate that, you're just essentially saying materialism is wrong 'because'. From my perspective in a sense yes, you're right, it's all just information processing of a particular kind. There's no magic. If you're looking for a special genie in an AI, or a human brain, that makes it conscious I don't think you'll find one. It's all just stuff. But then, I'm a materialist so I don't see that as being a problem.
- akimball 4y agoThe inability you describe is a pragmatic one, and may cease to pertain as abilities improve