3 ms·

> Because the neural correlates of consciousness wouldn't exist in their brain. And what are those in concrete terms? Why can't a computer program have those?

> Because the neural correlates of consciousness wouldn't exist in their brain. And what are those in concrete terms? Why can't a computer program have those? You have yet to articulate what special property is giving rise to this. > somewhere in it there are neurons which correlate with what is being experienced whenever something is looked at. And what exactly is special about the neuron that the biological hardware can do this but the inorganic can't? Is your claim that current silicon doesn't do this (but future might be able to) or that no silicon construction could _ever_ do this? You have yet to clearly articulate what this magical pixie dust of consciousness is supposed to be.

DonaldFisk 27d ago
> Why can't a computer program have those? Because it isn't a physical object capable of sensing the physical environment, the way the brain is via the sense organs. I don't rule out the possibility that a robot, equipped with with a camera and microphone and processing the information it receives from them might be conscious of sight and sound, but not a program. If I read and execute a computer program in my head, I'm conscious of my thoughts while doing that, but are those thoughts themselves conscious?? I don't think so. What would they be conscious of, anyway? > You have yet to clearly articulate what this magical pixie dust of consciousness is supposed to be. Nobody has an explanation of consciousness, so the magical pixie dust remains a mystery. I think it's fundamental. Nobody has proven the opposite: that it arises from things (e.g. information processing) happening in matter.