4 ms·

Dr Searle isn’t making a mistake, behaviorists are just unbelievably stubborn. Just because you cannot measure internal experience doesn’t mean we cant talk abo

Dr Searle isn’t making a mistake, behaviorists are just unbelievably stubborn. Just because you cannot measure internal experience doesn’t mean we cant talk about it. That’s just being dishonest. I also used to be a behaviorist but I grew up and became comfortable with not being able to objectify everything. Its okay. There is a subjective dimension. In fact, its great.

chpatrick 4y ago
Who's to say one's subjective experience isn't another's latent space.
- xmonkee 4y ago
  what does that mean?
  - chpatrick 4y ago
    I mean all the mysterious stuff that makes your experience special and subjective is also kicking around somewhere in the execution of say GPT.
    - xmonkee 4y ago
      The proof of my subjective experience is my subjective experience of it, not the fact that I can complete sentences. So saying chatgpt has consciousness because it can talk is a complete non-sequitor.
      - chpatrick 4y ago
        The problem is that you're the only one who experiences it so you can't prove it to anyone else. How do you know ChatGPT doesn't experience anything?
        xmonkee 4y ago
        Again, you could ask the same question of a rock, "How can you know this rock doesn't experience anything?" Obviously I don't know. But there is no reason to think a rock would. Similarly there is no reason to think ChatGPT would. You're assuming that the "proof" that humans have consciousness stems from their verbal ability. It has absolutely nothing to do with that. I have direct experience of my awareness and I think other people have it because they are people, not because they talk like people.
        chpatrick 4y ago
        > Again, you could ask the same question of a rock, "How can you know this rock doesn't experience anything?" Obviously I don't know. But there is no reason to think a rock would. Similarly there is no reason to think ChatGPT would. I don't think "no reason", "should", "would" are any use if we're talking about something that's impossible to measure and only experienced subjectively. The only reason you're more likely to think a human has subjective experience rather than a rock is that humans tell you they have the same experience. What if ChatGPT also tells you it has subjective experience? Also, where does subjective experience begin? Do rocks have it? How about amoebae? Jellyfish? Micro-organisms? Individual human cells? Insects? Mammals? Do larger systems than us like societies or ecosystems have subjective experience?

chpatrick 4y ago

Who's to say one's subjective experience isn't another's latent space.

xmonkee 4y ago
what does that mean?
- chpatrick 4y ago
  I mean all the mysterious stuff that makes your experience special and subjective is also kicking around somewhere in the execution of say GPT.
  - xmonkee 4y ago
    The proof of my subjective experience is my subjective experience of it, not the fact that I can complete sentences. So saying chatgpt has consciousness because it can talk is a complete non-sequitor.
    - chpatrick 4y ago
      The problem is that you're the only one who experiences it so you can't prove it to anyone else. How do you know ChatGPT doesn't experience anything?
      - xmonkee 4y ago
        Again, you could ask the same question of a rock, "How can you know this rock doesn't experience anything?" Obviously I don't know. But there is no reason to think a rock would. Similarly there is no reason to think ChatGPT would. You're assuming that the "proof" that humans have consciousness stems from their verbal ability. It has absolutely nothing to do with that. I have direct experience of my awareness and I think other people have it because they are people, not because they talk like people.
        chpatrick 4y ago
        > Again, you could ask the same question of a rock, "How can you know this rock doesn't experience anything?" Obviously I don't know. But there is no reason to think a rock would. Similarly there is no reason to think ChatGPT would. I don't think "no reason", "should", "would" are any use if we're talking about something that's impossible to measure and only experienced subjectively. The only reason you're more likely to think a human has subjective experience rather than a rock is that humans tell you they have the same experience. What if ChatGPT also tells you it has subjective experience? Also, where does subjective experience begin? Do rocks have it? How about amoebae? Jellyfish? Micro-organisms? Individual human cells? Insects? Mammals? Do larger systems than us like societies or ecosystems have subjective experience?