The Hard Problem of Gravity

[AkuManiMani]

Well, we also need to explain guallia, you know, that certain special feeling of gravity.

Until we can explain how gravity feels, the whole theory is dead in the water, worthless.

It feels like 'heavy'.

Now go use that knowledge to build someone who experiences it the same way.

 

[AkuManiMani]

No.

If you want to talk about discernible p-zombies then I suggest you redefine them aku-zombies, because the p-zombie was already taken and you aren't in agreement with the accepted definition.

Okay then.

I hereby declare 'p-zombies' to be nonsensical bunk that makes about as much logical sense (and are about as useful) as zero denominators and the last number. They are logically impossible and thus fail as a philosophical device.

In their place, I put aku-zombies!

Happy?

Or have you ignored all the other posts where people point this out to you?

Why individually address the same questions from multiple posts when I can just target the trolling OP?

Alright.

So how, in theory, would one go about discerning such a thing?

The same way I would test a web bot. Posit a question or challange to it that could potentially require some level of understanding and that it could not solve algorithmically.

Suppose there is a p-zombie of such high fidelity that any detector we use will report it as being a normal human (including using other normal humans as the detectors). How would you go about confirming that it is a p-zombie and not a human?

We've already decided that p-zombies are nonsense. From now on we will only use aku-zombies for they have a cooler name and do not disappear in a puff of logic.

Anywhooo...

An aku-zombie of such a high degree of craftsmanship would have to tentatively be accepted as conscious in much the same way that we tentatively accept scientific theories. A state of the art aku-zombie would, infact, be a reflection of our current level of understanding consciousness.

In much the same way our theories are merely conceptual models of reality, and not reality itself, so aku-zombies would be models of consciousness and not necessarily be absolute exemplars of it.

 

[Gate2501]

Its funny really, when I solved the HPC, I never knew that I would be able to reuse the solution for so many other problems in my day-to-day life.

Every day when I pull out of my driveway, I use exactly the same logic to avoid the imaginary lava pit, and the incorporeal kamikaze clown cars.

I ignore them, because they don't exist.

Problem solved.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Its funny really, when I solved the HPC, I never knew that I would be able to reuse the solution for so many other problems in my day-to-day life.

Every day when I pull out of my driveway, I use exactly the same logic to avoid the imaginary lava pit, and the incorporeal kamikaze clown cars.

I ignore them, because they don't exist.

Problem solved.

So should I become a solipsist, ignore your posts as the ramblings of a zombie, and just relegate my life to treating you, and other so-called 'people', the same way I would treat a rock or door-knob?

 

[Third Eye Open]

So should I become a solipsist, ignore your posts as the ramblings of a zombie, and just relegate my life to treating you and other so-called 'people' the same way I would treat a rock or door-knob?

I guess if you were a sociopath you could do that.

 

[AkuManiMani]

I guess if you were a sociopath you could do that.

If Gate2501 is right, then they too have come to the same solution to the HPC, and are logically putting it into practice.

 

[Gate2501]

So should I become a solipsist, ignore your posts as the ramblings of a zombie, and just relegate my life to treating you, and other so-called 'people', the same way I would treat a rock or door-knob?

So you do then, think that human consciousness is "special"? I would say that the only real difference between a door-knob and I, is complexity. I am a material entity, with a material mind. Just like a material door-knob. Is that what you are getting at? Do you believe that there is an immaterial aspect to the human mind?

An appeal to a subjective ethical dilemma(humans as door-knobs), does not make the case for the HPC.

 

[Third Eye Open]

If Gate2501 is right, then they too have come to the same solution to the HPC, and are logically putting it into practice.

Ugh, I don't even know why I bother with these threads.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKyGyH9mWHk&feature=related






I don't.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Ugh, I don't even know why I bother with these threads.

[Do you Believe in Magic?]


I don't.

You don't know the power of the Woo Side...!

 

[AkuManiMani]

So you do then, think that human consciousness is "special"? I would say that the only real difference between a door-knob and I, is complexity. I am a material entity, with a material mind. Just like a material door-knob. Is that what you are getting at? Do you believe that there is an immaterial aspect to the human mind?

As I've already stated in post #37, whether or not someone chooses to designate consciousness as 'special' is irrelevant to the fact that we don't fully understand it. Since when is admitting to ignorance tantamount to invoking magic??

The HPC [hard problem of consciousness] isn't an affirmative claim to knowledge about consciousness; its simply a recognition of the fact that we don't fully understand it. Period.

Pretending like we do or trying to rationalize away the HPC is like a physicist pretending to have found the ToE or that the question doesn't really matter. I suspect that what you, and some of the other posters here, are essentially doing is hiding from the problem out of some irrational fear. Most likely, the unfounded fear that the current inability to solve it somehow invokes magic.

What annoys me to no end is that, out of sheer intellectual cowardice, intelligent people like rocketdodger go thru their entire careers completely ignoring the the problem they are supposed to be working towards solving: How does one create a conscious entity?

We're not going to make any meaningful progress in that regard so long as people at the cutting edge of the search loose their nerve, out of fear of their own ignorance.

I'm going to tell you plainly. We don't know how recreate consciousness -- yet. We don't know the fundamental why and how of qualitative experience -- yet.

Its about time many of you folks here came to grips with that and quit turning your nose up at the problem just because you can't wrap your minds around it.

An appeal to a subjective ethical dilemma(humans as door-knobs), does not make the case for the HPC.

Okay, you're waaay more complex that a door-knob. So what?

What if I built a machine that was comparable to you in complextity? Why shouldn't I treat you and my machine the same way?

What if it can be demonstrated that not only is my machine more ''complex" than you but is also more useful to obtain my own personal goals? Why should I treat you any different than I would a less useful machine?

What if, not only were my creation more complex and more useful than you, but I had to choose between your life and the existence of my machine? Why should I choose your life over my precious machine?

 

[rocketdodger]

Okay then.

I hereby declare 'p-zombies' to be nonsensical bunk that makes about as much logical sense (and are about as useful) as zero denominators and the last number. They are logically impossible and thus fail as a philosophical device.

In their place, I put aku-zombies!

Happy?

Well now there is nothing to argue about.

The same way I would test a web bot. Posit a question or challange to it that could potentially require some level of understanding and that it could not solve algorithmically.

Oh, duh, silly me.

So, would you care to explain to us the challenge you use to determine whether your significant other is an aku-zombie?

An aku-zombie of such a high degree of craftsmanship would have to tentatively be accepted as conscious in much the same way that we tentatively accept scientific theories. A state of the art aku-zombie would, infact, be a reflection of our current level of understanding consciousness.

In much the same way our theories are merely conceptual models of reality, and not reality itself, so aku-zombies would be models of consciousness and not necessarily be absolute exemplars of it.

Yeah that works, except I never said the aku-zombies were manufactured by us. So how do you prove that all other humans are in fact not high-quality aku-zombies created by a much more advanced society?

 

[JetLeg]

As I've already stated in post #37, whether or not someone chooses to designate consciousness as 'special' is irrelevant to the fact that we don't fully understand it. Since when is admitting to ignorance tantamount to invoking magic??

The HPC [hard problem of consciousness] isn't an affirmative claim to knowledge about consciousness; its simply a recognition of the fact that we don't fully understand it. Period.

Pretending like we do or trying to rationalize away the HPC is like a physicist pretending to have found the ToE or that the question doesn't really matter. I suspect that what you, and some of the other posters here, are essentially doing is hiding from the problem out of some irrational fear. Most likely, the unfounded fear that the current inability to solve it somehow invokes magic.

What annoys me to no end is that, out of sheer intellectual cowardice, intelligent people like rocketdodger go thru their entire careers completely ignoring the the problem they are supposed to be working towards solving: How does one create a conscious entity?

We're not going to make any meaningful progress in that regard so long as people at the cutting edge of the search loose their nerve, out of fear of their own ignorance.

I'm going to tell you plainly. We don't know how recreate consciousness -- yet. We don't know the fundamental why and how of qualitative experience -- yet.

Its about time many of you folks here came to grips with that and quit turning your nose up at the problem just because you can't wrap your minds around it.



Okay, you're waaay more complex that a door-knob. So what?

What if I built a machine that was comparable to you in complextity? Why shouldn't I treat you and my machine the same way?

What if it can be demonstrated that not only is my machine more ''complex" than you but is also more useful to obtain my own personal goals? Why should I treat you an different than I would a less useful machine?

What if, not only were my creation more complex and more useful than you, but I had to choose between your life and the existence of my machine? Why should I choose your life over my precious machine?

My Thread "Materealism and Morality" asked those questions.

A materealist can answer "because a human has feelings".

Quoting from the dictionary of the philosophy of mind :

Proponents of nonreductive materialism reject the latter view, and affirm that psychological properties can be exemplified even in a material world

So, he can argue that a human being exemplifies psychological properties. And therefore, he should be treated morally. Of course, he should also explain how psychological properties can be exemplified in a material world, and I think that it would be pretty hard to explain...

(Note : the dictionary actually says

Proponents of nonreductive materialism reject the latter view, and affirm that psychological properties can be exemplified even in an immaterial world

but it makes no sense in the context.

 

[JetLeg]

__

 

[AkuManiMani]

Well now there is nothing to argue about.

Hey, how could I? You just named a new philosophical device after me. I'm honored

Oh, duh, silly me.

So, would you care to explain to us the challenge you use to determine whether your significant other is an aku-zombie?

Engage them in a discussion like this one

Yeah that works, except I never said the aku-zombies were manufactured by us. So how do you prove that all other humans are in fact not high-quality aku-zombies created by a much more advanced society?

No idea.

But -- I do know that there is atleast one being in the universe who is conscious: me.

I also know that whatever their origin, I did not consciously create any of the alleged aku-zombies around me. I would be left to suspect that if they are aku-zombies, there is another conscious agency/agencies out there that went thru the effort of perpetuating such a hoax to fool me.

Being as how I'm not that much of a megalomaniac to assume an entire civilization is out to fool me, its safe to assume that the other animated meat critters share consciousness in common with me. As far as my current understanding of consciousness goes they pass the test, and I will treat them as if we do share that important commonality.

 

[rocketdodger]

What annoys me to no end is that, out of sheer intellectual cowardice, intelligent people like rocketdodger go thru their entire careers completely ignoring the the problem they are supposed to be working towards solving: How does one create a conscious entity?

We're not going to make any meaningful progress in that regard so long as people at the cutting edge of the search loose their nerve, out of fear of their own ignorance.

Hmmm, an interesting theory.

If you are correct, what is to be done? I mean, you are complaining about a problem --what is your solution?

How should the people at the cutting edge of the search behave differently? What should I, as an A.I. programmer, do to 1) remedy my cowardice and 2) work harder towards the single problem that I want to solve more than anything else in the world?

I'm going to tell you plainly. We don't know how recreate consciousness -- yet. We don't know the fundamental why and how of qualitative experience -- yet.

Well, we know some things about it. For instance, we know that if it can be understood by us then it must be mathematically describable.

Its about time many of you folks here came to grips with that and quit turning your nose up at the problem just because you can't wrap your minds around it.

Again -- assuming we come to grips with it, how should our behavior change?

 

[Third Eye Open]

What annoys me to no end is that, out of sheer intellectual cowardice, intelligent people like rocketdodger go thru their entire careers completely ignoring the the problem they are supposed to be working towards solving: How does one create a conscious entity?

Umm, people are trying to do this all around the world. Programmers and robotics specialists have been trying to make artificial intelligence for years.

The only problem is that people like you will never be satisfied that something is self aware, or conscious. Even if a mechanical being were build that had a mechanical brain that was every bit as complex as a human brain, and exhibited all the correct characteristics, you would still say 'but how do we know for real and for true that it really is really conscious?'

Well, what would it take for you to be convinced that a something is conscious? I'm guessing that the answer will be 'it has to be human' or if you're one of those p-zombie whack-jobs the answer will be 'it has to be me'.

So, what annoys me to no end is that, out of sheer intellectual masturbation, intelligent people like akumanimani go thru their entire careers completely wasting their time with meaningless 'problems' like this instead of actually doing anything.

 

[rocketdodger]

But -- I do know that there is atleast one being in the universe who is conscious: me.

As far as my current understanding of consciousness goes they pass the test, and I will treat them as if we do share that important commonality.

Well, if one reads the latter statement before the former, they might think of this question for you: Since your current understanding of consciousness is clearly incomplete, how do you know your consciousness is real and not merely a simulated aku-zombie behavior?

 

[Foster Zygote]

Yea man, seriously. I was like, playing this video game the other day and -- like -- the objects on the screen fell just like they were under the effects of gravity. But how can I tell whether it was real gravity or not? I can only logically assume that since it looked like gravity it must be gravity.

Turn the monitor upside down and see what happens.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Turn the monitor upside down and see what happens.

Hmm... lets see...


Holy *%$&-◊◊◊◊! Sir Issac Newton is Turning in his grave! Duuuuude!

 

[quarky]

Aku-Zombies have the problem of acting dumb enough to pass as human. They will need to flub lots of questions, or they'll be found out.
As long as they aren't 'outed' they should have no problem achieving normal human-rights...as they have done for centuries.



(The bastards)