3 ms·
I disagree. I'm a physicalist, so I believe consciousness/qualia emerges from physical processes in the brain. It's absolutely possible for a computer be consci
by fasterik 4y ago
I disagree. I'm a physicalist, so I believe consciousness/qualia emerges from physical processes in the brain. It's absolutely possible for a computer be conscious provided it implements the right kind of computational process. Ultimately, whether or not a system is conscious is an empirical question that neuroscience will be able to answer once we have the right theoretical framework and tools for measuring the relevant variables.
I don't know what you mean by it being a BS definition of sentience. It's a technical term invented by philosophers to mean a specific thing. If you don't like it, use a different word.
- Robotbeat 4y agoThat is what I mean. /Subjective/ experiences are part of the usual definition of consciousness and sentience. Qualia, as opposed to quantia. If you’re trying to protect the human mind from ever being probably replicable in operation by a machine, it helps to pick an unfalsifiable definition of consciousness and sentience.
- fasterik 4y agoI don't get it. Who are you attributing this view to? I already said that I believe everything about consciousness/qualia/subjectivity are physical and measurable. There is nothing special about the human mind preventing us from replicating it in a machine. Note: you brought up the term qualia, not me. I have never actually liked that term. I prefer the terms "consciousness" and "conscious experience".
- Robotbeat 4y agoOkay, then we are in agreement!