[ExI] People often think their chatbot is alive

[Brent Allsop]

Hi Adrian,
Yes, thanks so much, this is exactly the kind of information I'm interested
in.  I hope others will help communicate what they think about p-zombies
and "conscious computer brain simulations?"

We could go deeper into this, if you'd like, but this is a bit off the main
thing I'm asking about p-zombies and "conscious computer brain simulations?"

You said: "Things like redness might be part of it, " which says to me you
would agree that, though the one on the right can "function" the same (as
in can tell you the strawberry is red) you would not consider it to have
the same kind of conscious knowledge as you, who knows the physical
definition of redness, and would answer different than the one on the
right, when asked: "What is redness like for you?"

[image: 3_functionally_equal_machines_tiny.png]

Do you think redness can 'arise' from ones and zeros, as other
functionalists
<https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Theories-of-Consciousness/18-Qualia-Emerge-from-Function>
evidently believe.
I guess my question is, are you a   functionalists
<https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Theories-of-Consciousness/18-Qualia-Emerge-from-Function>,
as I believe most transhumanists are   ?









On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 8:59 AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 6:31 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> And I'd like to know what everyone thinks about p-zombies and "conscious
>> computer brain simulations."
>>
>> First off, would you agree that consciousness is composed of elemental
>> intrinsic qualities (I don't like the label 'qualia', though it is a label
>> for the same thing) like redness, greenness, warmth, and so on.
>>
>
> You asked for everyone's opinions, so...
>
> No I would not.  Consciousness is a pattern.  Things like redness might be
> part of it, but to say it is "composed of" them is to miss the higher order
> properties and possibly other elements.
>
> It would be like saying that water is composed of quarks (which make
> electrons, neutrons, and protons, which make atoms, which make molecules)
> and then trying to derive the melting point, freezing expansion, and other
> properties of water only from the properties of its quarks in isolation.
> This misses the properties that result from the quarks' interactions, not
> to mention the interactions of higher order units, where most of the
> interesting properties come from.
>
> Or it would be like saying that, because water is part of all known
> biological beings, to know how biology works it suffices to know how water
> works, and then struggling to identify how water eats, excretes, and
> reproduces.
>
>> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220716/5c917290/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 3_functionally_equal_machines_tiny.png
Type: image/png
Size: 26214 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220716/5c917290/attachment-0001.png>