3 ms·
I don't mean to get bogged down in a grammatical argument, but I really did intend to set a lower standard than sapience. What I mean is the second definition g
by sdurkin 18y ago
I don't mean to get bogged down in a grammatical argument, but I really did intend to set a lower standard than sapience. What I mean is the second definition given by the OED for sentience, "self-awareness."
For example, I could make a robot that made all the expressions of pain when injured. Would such a robot be sentient? I doubt it. Perhaps I'm blinded by speciesist prejudices, but I still draw a bright clear line between humans, which are both sentient and sapient, and everything else.
There's definitely no cause for sapience in animals, but I doubt if there's even a case for sentience outside of some higher primates.
- DaniFong 18y agoDo other humans even pass your test? How can you be sure that they are not producing behavior simply consistent with sentience, rather than actually being indicative. Animals too have behavior consistent with subjective emotional experience. What separates theirs from ours, except our prejudice?
- sdurkin 18y agoI can tell humans are sapient through high level communication of complex thoughts that could only come from a sentient being. I know humans are sentient because sentience is a precondition to sapience.