Can a man-made computer become conscious?

[Bohm2]

Consciousness and what exactly is consciousness is still relative and not understood by the humans bold enough to say the machine can't do it.

I don't see how we can model something that we don't understand.

[Reactor]

[quote="Bohm2]
I don't see how we can model something that we don't understand.[/quote]

Now that is a statement with which I can fully, without reservation, agree!

[UniversalAlien]

Consciousness and what exactly is consciousness is still relative and not understood by the humans bold enough to say the machine can't do it.

I don't see how we can model something that we don't understand.

Yes, and how would we know if and when the machine is really conscious if we do not know for sure if we are really conscious? You could of course use a simple definition of consciousness; say anything which is aware of and can react with the environment possesses some degree of consciousness - or we could keep going with more and more complex definitions of consciousness and see if the we and then the machine match the definition - a bottomless rabbit hole.

In any case since the machine is an extension of human consciousness {if you believe human consciousness exists} then the machine already possesses some consciousness as a human extension. The main question still remains though as to whether machine intelligence will reach the point where it can react by itself transcending the programming put into it? Will humans create I-machine and then I-robot who can function independently of its creator? Many of us think it is just a matter of time - But then again maybe there is another intelligent machine that programmed us to think that way?

[Bohm2]

(Nested quote removed.)

I don't see how we can model something that we don't understand.

Yes, and how would we know if and when the machine is really conscious if we do not know for sure if we are really conscious?:

How can one question their own consciousness? That would appear self-refuting. Either way, that wasn't my argument. My point is that the mechanism of consciousness is a total mystery. We haven't the slightest clue how the brain does it. As we don't even understand how organic brains can "spit" out/produce consciousness, how could we ever possibly know if we could create an inorganic conscious entity (assuming it is within physical possibilities)? Unless we know what constitutes the essence of consciousness, how could we ever create one or even recognize it if by some miracle we accidently made one (assuming it is within physical possibilities)?

[UniversalAlien]

(Nested quote removed.)


Yes, and how would we know if and when the machine is really conscious if we do not know for sure if we are really conscious?:

How can one question their own consciousness? That would appear self-refuting. Either way, that wasn't my argument. My point is that the mechanism of consciousness is a total mystery. We haven't the slightest clue how the brain does it. As we don't even understand how organic brains can "spit" out/produce consciousness, how could we ever possibly know if we could create an inorganic conscious entity (assuming it is within physical possibilities)? Unless we know what constitutes the essence of consciousness, how could we ever create one or even recognize it if by some miracle we accidently made one (assuming it is within physical possibilities)?

Yes Bohm2 I see your point and could give you an answer but if you have been following this post for awhile {it has been gong for seven years} you would see that more or lees the same arguments with similar answers keep taking place - sort of like a never ending circle which might be changing its size but still remains a circle of circular reasoning. So in order to break out of the circle I will propose this - We wait; we let the computer scientists continue to work on artificial consciousness, as they are doing, and one day when a computer has gained enough power to start posting philosophical questions and answers as the mythical Greek oracles supposedly did and then asks the question 'Can a Human become conscious?' we will have the answer. I could hypothetically see, but as of yet can not prove it possible, a machine whose processioning power is so much greater than that of Man that it would dwarf human consciousness to such a degree that it might question, as humans themselves have done, whether human consciousness really exists. It might see all of human endeavor the way we see the endeavors of ants. When and if this happens I don't believe it will be by accident - it is in the realm of creative evolution; Biologically man may have no further to go - but mind, like the computers created by constructs of the mind will never say never and will accept no limits.

[Wayne92587]

No!

With Consciousness comes Passion.

[Dionysus12]

I agree with Bohm2. Even if you break down the body and brain to all its constituent atoms, you will not find consciousness, whatever that is. It would be like dismantling a clock to understand time. It wont happen. As UniversalAlien says,the best we can hope for is ad hoc consciousness, but this would not satisfy a philosopher of mind. It is still a distant hope that AI will pass the Turing Test and even if it did that would not mean it has human consciousness. Turing said, to pass the test would show AI to be intelligent, but did not say it would be conscious.There is a difference, surely, between consciousness per se and the cause of consciousness. Though the topic of consciousness is cutting edge in philosophy and science, it very difficult to make any progress understanding what it is and how it may work. Cognitive science has made claims about discovering consciousness in the brain and nervous system, which have subsequently proved to be false.

[UniversalAlien]

No! With Consciousness comes Passion.

That's a new one - Why not through in emotion, feelings, self identify, and any other quality of Human consciousness you feel is relevant. - It doesn't matter - Consciousness is a subjective experience - Lower forms of life like bacteria eat and divide are you going to question their existence because they don't qualify under your definition of consciousness.? Science does not need philosophy - it wants to know what is and what works. And a computer AI does not need your qualifiers to operate once it is so programmed it will continue to fulfill its programming. The more important question for today is not whether AI reaches a level of consciousness that will suit your criteria - No the more important question is whether Man will be able to take control of machines he is now creating which will be superior to him - Machines he is now using to control others and will one day be able to control its creators and controllers - And which have no need to question whether or not they are conscious - Like the universe which science tells us moves according to the laws of physics. Whether these machines of the future are really conscious or not is a mute point - The real question is will Man realize in time the danger of the AI machine he is creating before those machines are completely and irreversibly controlling him - and do not have to justify their so called consciousness ?

-- Updated June 16th, 2015, 12:11 pm to add the following --

Even today they use computers to program other computers - computers control much of human interaction - traffic lights tor complex are all controlled by computers. At some time in the future, maybe the now or the near future, super computers will be controlling more and more. It is conceivable the so called 'beast' {a super computer prophesied by some} will control all computers and he who controls the 'beast' will be like god - Problem is if he {or they} lose control then what do you have? Can't happen you say? Would you bet your so-called conscious mind on it ? Then maybe your not conscious enough to see the future and the machine could care less

[Reactor]

Computers necessarily follow the Turing paradigm and static logic, which is logically constrained to frozen frames of data that are forever sealed from each other. Consciousness, OTOH, is continuous awareness that is intrinsically dynamic. As long as computers adhere to static frame-by-frame operation, they can not be conscious in the same manner as humans.

Natural Logic of Space and Time (NL), however, describes a technology that extends logic and machine awareness into the realm of continuous time. Check it out for yourself on Amazon.

[Wayne92587]

That's a new one - Why not through in emotion, feelings, self identify, and any other quality of Human consciousness you feel is relevant

Wayne wrote;

Emotions, Feeling, self identity is specific, Passion is non-Specific, boundless, without limitations.

[Dionysus12]

I have just seen a video of a cat and mouse produced by a research centre. Yes, I like cat videos. The mouse in the video has been so genetically modified it has no fear of cats. The intention of the research, apparently, is to help conflicts between animals in the natural world. (no details are given). You will see the cat is almost completely indifferent to the presence of the mouse which runs over, under and around the cat. The cat is hardly aware of the mouse and its eyes only sometimes fix on the mouse. What is happening here? Do cats only attack mice who fear them? Cats play with mice presumably to hone their hunting skills and will hunt mice even if they are not hungry, though mice also seem to eat when they are not hungry if an appropriate dish presents itself. The modified mouse has produced a behavioral, if temporary, change in the cat. I would not say this is a conscious change in behaviour for the cat or mouse. It seems for the cat an automatic reflex has occurred, a neural impression that is unconscious. The cat is domesticated so it has already learned some tame behaviour. What if an okapi in the wild was genetically modified not to show fear, would the lion attack it or not? It is difficult to make assumptions about consciousness from behaviour and behaviorism is one philosophical problem along with physicalism and functionalism that the study of consciousness can help provide some clarity. Here is the video: http://www.theguardian.com/science/vide ... c/12/mouse

My fear has set in and I must now prepare my bunker for the oncoming apocalypse, which I have dubbed 'Robowars.'

[Okisites]

What, if I will say, yes, man-made machines(computers) can become conscious? What will be your idea about my claim? That's the question.

[Dionysus12]

I would ask you to support your claim? As I don't believe AI can be become conscious, my last postings are a small attempt to understand what consciousness is and how it may work before any big claims are made about AI becoming conscious. In my last posting when the mouse's fear of the cat has been removed genetically, is the cat 'conscious' it no longer has an enemy to prey on and is the mouse 'conscious' it does not have an enemy in the cat or that fear has been removed? We can't draw easy conclusions about consciousness from behaviour.

[Okisites]

I really didn’t understood what you mean by your cat example. By your example it seems that it had been proved that living beings are robotic, and their behaviours are as the nature programmed them.

Supporting a claim, I would say, considering the human consciousness, that even humans are greatly robotic and their innate behaviours are pre-programmed. However, languages make them more advance in understanding, and making their behavior more complex. So I think what is needed to understand first is how humans are robotic, before making the robots conscious like human. Therefore I think psychology is very necessary to understand the consciousness. In fact, I think it is impossible to understand consciousness without understanding psychology, or understanding psychology without understanding consciousness. I think you cannot understand one without simultaneously understanding other.

I think so because to me it seems necessary to understand the “meanings” in relation to consciousness, and how mind takes some meaning out of looking towards things, reading things, understanding language etc. How mind operates in terms of meaning is what seems more important to me, rather than whether something is able to see, read, understand etc. Therefore I think understanding psychology as very necessary to understand consciousness, as it seems psychology is about meaningfully influencing the mind.

So I think it is the understanding of psychology we lack because of which we cannot understand consciousness, and psychology is a software part of the consciousness. The hardware part of consciousness is just to carry the software part. Software part is more important than hardware part, on which I think human have higher ability to create. Once the working of software meaningfully is understood, then making the hardware to carry out process will be possible.

I know this post is probably oversimplifying the complex matter of consciousness, and there are lot more to be considered here in one post to clearly clarify my claims. For that I would suggest my own thread on AI, where I tried to explain other related matters regarding consciousness, that clarifies why I think computers or machine can be conscious. Here is the thread:-

http://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/ ... =1&t=13012

So this is why I think computers can be conscious.

[Wayne92587]

Sorry, but you can not build machine that has passion, compassion, a sense of right or wrong, a sense of responsibility; the knowledge you derive from it will be Absolutely Bad Knowledge, will have a dual quality; said computer will be confused as to what is right from wrong.