4 ms·
The only thing you can do is ask rhetorical questions to make your position seem obvious. Which should tell you how little you understand the thing in question.
by Jtarii 5mo ago
The only thing you can do is ask rhetorical questions to make your position seem obvious. Which should tell you how little you understand the thing in question.
- suddenlybananas 5mo agoMy point is it is very difficult to disprove that something has consciousness. What would be sufficient evidence that a rock is not conscious? The onus is on those making extraordinary claims (that a computer program is conscious) to provide evidence for it.
- DiogenesKynikos 5mo agoLLMs are able to do almost everything that we consider human intelligence, and in many areas of intelligence, they have surpassed us. It's not at all extraordinary to assume they're conscious.
- suddenlybananas 5mo agoThat's simply not true.
- DiogenesKynikos 5mo agoIt absolutely is true. LLMs know more than any human being, are simultaneously experts in nearly every field of science and humanities, are able to make novel mathematical discoveries, can write and understand every major written language, and can give you an intelligent answer to almost any question you pose to them. How is that not human-level intelligence? If a human could do all of that, we would consider them a genius.
- Jtarii 5mo ago>The onus is on those making extraordinary claims (that a computer program is conscious) to provide evidence for it. By saying that a computer program is not conscious you are also making an extraordinary claim. You would have to hold an agnostic position until there is a test for consciousness. You are relying on intuitive obviousness and rhetoric to make the opposing side look ridiculous "how could a TOASTER be conscious, preposterous!", you aren't making a actual positive argument for your view.
- suddenlybananas 5mo agoLet's say I insist that rocks are conscious and I ask you to disprove that. How would you go about doing that? It's a genuine question. I assume that we both think rocks are not conscious, but I'm genuinely unsure of how one could prove this.
- Jtarii 5mo agoI would agree that a rock is not sentient, but determining whether or not it is conscious would require a definition of consciousness and a machine that could test for it.
- ikrenji 5mo agoit's not very difficult, it's impossible right now. you know you yourself are conscious and that's all that you can prove. you can extrapolate to other people and animals and plants but that's not proof