3 ms·
of course; consciousness is a biologically inherited trait. that inheritance can't cross the human-machine interface.
by adyashakti 7mo ago
of course; consciousness is a biologically inherited trait. that inheritance can't cross the human-machine interface.
- JPLeRouzic 7mo ago> consciousness is a biologically inherited trait That consciousness is a biologically trait seems a common statement, but why "inherited"?
- subscribed 7mo agoI presume you used "biologically" to emphasise we don't yet know any non-biological consciousnesses, not that you determine, a priori, that the consciousness must be and is always rooted in the wet organic matter? I don't think you could come up with a good theory for the latter and there's nothing that would preclude the existence of the artificial / inorganic consciousness - after all, correct me if I'm mistaken, we have no idea how the consciousness emerge in some biological entities.
- fat_cantor 7mo agoThat's what the paper's abstract says: >Crucially, this argument does not rely on biological exclusivity. If an artificial system were ever conscious, it would be because of its specific physical constitution, never its syntactic architecture.
- subscribed 6mo agoYeah, this is why I wanted to understand what they were saying.
- postalrat 7mo agoSure if that's how you define consciousness. What do you want to call the machine version of the same phenomenon?
- pixl97 7mo ago"Consciousness is magical and can only do things that I want it to, and none of the things that are uncomfortable to me. Of course I've not defined any of this so I can move the goal posts as needed"
- deepthaw 7mo agowhy? i'm not being snarky, i'm trying to figure out what we even consider consciousness to be nowadays and why it'd be limited to biological entities.