[ExI] Digital Consciousness .

[Brent Allsop]

Anders,

As usual, you have lots of great things to say.  But help me understand 
exactly what you mean by "level independent" consciousness.

Are you saying that if you have or experience some of that, then you 
know that it is fundamental, and can't be an abstract simulation at some 
abstracted or interpreted higher level?  In other words, if what you are 
saying is true, then that would be proof that our consciousness is at 
the fundamental level, and can't be at some arbitrary abstracted or 
interpreted level above that?

Brent Allsop


On 4/24/2013 2:26 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> On 24/04/2013 19:07, spike wrote:
>> I agree humans are not akin to digital computers. What I am asking is 
>> if we can take a buttload of digital computers, connect them all 
>> together, each running models of brain cells, and create something 
>> that is kinda sorta akin to a human brain? If not, how about some 
>> simpler but still conscious brain perhaps? Or if not conscious, at 
>> least reactive to its surroundings?
>
> The problem is that a model is not the same thing as the system being 
> modeled. (Let's leave aside that the simulation may not simulate 
> everything going on in the system; say we actually have all the 
> elements and causal links correctly represented.)
>
> A simulated hurricane does not make you wet as you sit in front of the 
> computer - simulated people in the simulation might indeed get 
> simulatedly wet, but the wetness does not carry between the levels. 
> The big question is whether there are some things that do exist 
> independently of level.
>
> When your calculator performs a calculation, one can argue that there 
> is an isomorphism between its result and a "real" calculation that is 
> level-independent. Similarly I think intelligence is 
> level-independent: it does not matter how intelligent behavior or 
> answers are produced, they are still intelligent even if they happen 
> inside a simulation. If you can simulate something level-independent 
> you can get it for "real". But there is no agreement on consciousness: 
> it is not obvious that it can even be level-independent, since it is 
> private.
>
> Personally, being a functionalist, I think consciousness is just 
> information processing and is level-independent. But this is just 
> metaphysical guesswork. However, since philosophical zombies seem to 
> be incoherent (why would would zombie philosophers on zombie Earth go 
> to consciousness conferences rather than conferences on some other 
> arbitrary non-existent property?) consciousness must have some causal 
> power, so if you can successfully emulate a human brain and get it to 
> discuss its consciousness, I think you likely have evidence that 
> consciousness is level-independent. This is one reason I think brain 
> emulation will be useful: it will clean out plenty of theories in 
> philosophy of mind one way or another.
>