3 ms·

> But if we make machines that are smarter than us and have desires It is a hypothesis that human desires - the conscious processes involved in thinking "I wan

> But if we make machines that are smarter than us and have desires It is a hypothesis that human desires - the conscious processes involved in thinking "I want such-and-such" - influence human behavior. Consciousness is not whatsoever a solved problem, and it may be that we are just complex, deterministic automatons whose consciousness and desires are caused by our behavior (like the steam produced by an engine), rather than causing it. I'm not necessarily in this camp, but I bring this up to point out that there is an awful lot of common prejudice bundled up in what we consider our own intelligence/consciousness to be, and we project these biases onto what we imagine AI will be. We almost certainly misunderstand our own consciousness profoundly in this way, and at any rate there is no definitive scientific (or philosophical) answer to "what is self awareness" or "what role do desires play in human behavior" (again, the desire could be the steam from the engine).

amelius 12y ago
> and it may be that we are just complex, deterministic automatons whose consciousness and desires are caused by our behavior (like the steam produced by an engine), rather than causing it. Then explain that we are talking about it.
- mbillie1 12y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your point. Computers communicate with one another constantly. There certainly does seem to be something different about us, but I've yet to see any scientific or philosophical proof that our self-awareness is necessarily involved with our intelligence or behavior. There's a good deal of philosophical literature around this idea ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie ), and virtually no scientific explanation of consciousness. I grant of course that this may not be a terribly useful way for human beings to view themselves, and it is quite contrary to popular belief, but for all that it could still be true.
david-given 12y ago
Just as an example of what you're saying: a few posts up the index, there was an article on intelligence and language in dolphins. Dolphins are practically our cousins --- they're social mammals living in much the same world we do, and a lot of their behaviour maps directly onto ours. But they're so alien to us that we're still arguing about whether they are intelligent, low alone how much. If we can't even communicate effectively with them, what chance have we with a machine intelligence with which we have nothing whatsoever in common, not even time and space?

amelius 12y ago

> and it may be that we are just complex, deterministic automatons whose consciousness and desires are caused by our behavior (like the steam produced by an engine), rather than causing it. Then explain that we are talking about it.

mbillie1 12y ago
I'm not sure I understand your point. Computers communicate with one another constantly. There certainly does seem to be something different about us, but I've yet to see any scientific or philosophical proof that our self-awareness is necessarily involved with our intelligence or behavior. There's a good deal of philosophical literature around this idea ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie ), and virtually no scientific explanation of consciousness. I grant of course that this may not be a terribly useful way for human beings to view themselves, and it is quite contrary to popular belief, but for all that it could still be true.

david-given 12y ago

Just as an example of what you're saying: a few posts up the index, there was an article on intelligence and language in dolphins. Dolphins are practically our cousins --- they're social mammals living in much the same world we do, and a lot of their behaviour maps directly onto ours. But they're so alien to us that we're still arguing about whether they are intelligent, low alone how much. If we can't even communicate effectively with them, what chance have we with a machine intelligence with which we have nothing whatsoever in common, not even time and space?