Russell of Los Angeles wrote:Premises:
If a computer can create consciousness, then eggs moved by an algorithm can create consciousness.
It is not the case that eggs moved by an algorithm can create consciousness.
Conclusion:
It is not the case that a computer can create consciousness.
I so don't see that argument
... Yes, if a computer can do it, a bunch of eggs can as well (sorry, deadboy, I'm not the slightest convinced of your argument), but I don't see at all why it would be obvious that a bunch of eggs cannot create consciousness (or rather, the movement of the eggs).
Deadboy, I think you're confusing the system of the eggs with the eggs themselves. All the eggs together, through their movements, based on fixed algorithms, which in turn react to their environment (the replication of our senses), could perhaps be conscious, while none of the eggs obviously is. It's much like none of your neurons are likely to be conscious.
I'm not as convinced as HF that we can replicate consciousness with computers. We might, I just don't think we know enough to know
. I do think, however, that there is no reason to think that we definitely cannot.
About the binary nature of computers: didn't mathematicians prove that you can store as much in binary data as in any form of data? As long as you have a large enough number of bits? So I think it's bogus to think that there is a problem in that particular respect.
About the physical vs metaphysical character of consciousness, I think I'm somewhere between you guys. I think it's silly if not arrogant to assume that we know all types of physical forces that exist, and that thus can have an impact on consciousness. There might be things in this world we don't know. Simply because we didn't notice them, or perhaps because our senses just don't pick up on it. But I agree with HF that it is not necessary to refer to some higher, metaphysical, never to be understood powers to be able to explain consciousness. I also believe consciousness is in the end a material, physical thing, or at least generated by physical interactions of elements of the mind.
So the key is to try to understand what we can and cannot logically proof. We cannot, imho, proof that computers cannot replicate consciousness, and an appeal to my intuition by making it sounds funny by using egg boxes is a lame argument, imo. Yes, consciousness through eggs seems less plausible than through bits, but that's just because intuition is less rational ... and these things one should study rationally, imho.
That's good.
