3 ms·
It seems to me like any attempt to refute that such a description is possible would rely on arguments surrounding the so-called "hard problem of consciousness".
by slondr 3y ago
It seems to me like any attempt to refute that such a description is possible would rely on arguments surrounding the so-called "hard problem of consciousness". These arguments are nearly always tautological, and also nearly always implicitly at the center of discussions around whether AI can be/will be/is already sentient.
- goatlover 3y agoIt's not just that but also because there is no complete understanding of physics or biology such that we could make use of to predict the behavior of human beings. You need additional fields like psychology, economics, politics and sociology. It's not even clear that we could make sense of human behavior at those levels.
- slondr 3y ago"You need to use psychology (etc) to understand human behavior because there is no complete understanding of physics or biology" to accomplish that goal is exactly one of those tautological claims I was referring to earlier. Why is it that biology and physics is insufficient to explain human behavior? You can't answer that question beyond attacking the question itself without invoking metaphysics, and there are pretty much no metaphysical claims you can make about human behavior that you can't also make about robot behavior.
- consilient 3y ago> Why is it that biology and physics is insufficient to explain human behavior? They're insufficient to explain human behavior to humans, which is the thing that matters here. You can't fit a complete physical description of your brain inside your brain.