3 hours ago, FBW737 said:

the remarks I quoted are complete rubbish

 

Why?

15 hours ago, FBW737 said:

After a statement like that, I'm not surprised her career is over

 

3 hours ago, FBW737 said:

she should stick to physics and its critique.

 

11 hours ago, FBW737 said:

You clearly know nothing about about the scientific method.

Interesting how challenges to deeply-held and unsubstantiated beliefs descend into attempts to discredit the proposer rather than critique the idea itself.   Of course, there's not much else that holders of such beliefs can do, other than reiterate their blind faith in them.

The suggestion has been made that the scientific community should drop its widely-supported hypothesis that consciousness is a physical process.  This goes against the entire thrust of the scientific movement, which has explained practically everything else that was thought to lie in the realm of the gods as a natural process.  That's basically what science does, and has done in spite of those who believed, and stood by their beliefs,  in Thor's hammer creating thunder, a geocentric universe, non-evolution and the like. It's what the tools it has have been designed to do. 

I'm not saying that consciousness IS a physical process, just that it is the business of science to investigate how it can be explained as a physical process. Saying that "science [must acknowledge]  that conciousness is seperate from mind" isn't any help, except for hand-waving apologists.  For if it isn't a physical process, what is it?  Contrary to popular imagination, scientists don't just go "looking for" something, they must have an idea - a working hypothesis, even if it's wrong - to look for.

Perhaps one day those who know everything will come up with a concrete suggestion that can be investigated.  Until then, scientists can only plod on along the only, and provably successful, path they know how to tread. 

This is an interesting discussion.  I have often wondered if a computer could actually become "conscious".  I think it could.

My personal belief is that humans have a spirit, or soul, that is separate from our physical bodies.  This is a belief; I cannot prove it. 

I look at it this way: I love dogs and I see that they often act like human children - they like to play, and they display emotions like happiness, sadness, anxiety, jealousy, and anger.  So are dogs "conscious"?  I would say based on their behavior that they are.

The real question, then, is "are they self-aware?".  Well, I don't know because dogs can't talk, but I doubt that they are.  Anyway, being self-aware, like thinking about and acknowledging your existence, asking what you are and why you are here, and thinking about your circumstances and your future, and expressing gratitude, is the true test of whether something is "sentient" like humans IMO.

I think that AI may eventually become self-aware.  When it does, I say watch out, because it likely won't have feelings like compassion or empathy as most humans do.

Dave

Edited March 9, 20242 yr by dave2013

On 3/8/2024 at 1:09 AM, lzamm said:

The suggestion has been made that the scientific community should drop its widely-supported hypothesis that consciousness is a physical process.

I'm suggesting nothing of the sort. I had typed a longer response to this but when I can back to complete it it was atypically gone. Well I'm not doing it again. The short version is that the widely-supported hypothesis (BTW the Hypothesis that consciousness is not merely a physical process is also widely supported in serious academic circles) that consciousness is a physical process is in fact a religious conviction and a myopic one at that!🤪 I've wasted enough time on this bu bye.

Edited March 10, 20242 yr by FBW737

On 3/10/2024 at 5:22 AM, FBW737 said:

I'm suggesting nothing of the sort

Apologies if I wasn't clear.  That suggestion was made by @SierraHotel.

Just to clarify, not to continue the topic.

Just running a cleaning program on my computer, some message about out of date apps, resolving issues, seems to be stuck on the same message now for at least 10 minutes. How long does one wait?

This is exactly the type of thing where I'd welcome an AI assistant into my system. I don't know squat about computers, and like most people who don't know how their car engines work, I don't care. I just want it to work. I don't want to see some little spinning circle and be left wondering how long to wait before giving up and starting over. Mr. AI, what's going on? How long do I need to wait.

But of course, like out of scifi novels, there are scary sides to it.

"Good morning, I saw you were sleeping a bit fitfully last night. I analyzed your brainwaves and went ahead and accesed your phone and messaged your boss and all your coworkers, letting them know how you really feel about them.'