[ExI] GPT-4 on its inability to solve the symbol grounding problem

[Jason Resch]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2023, 3:19 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:25 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> What do you think would happen to a person whose visual cortex were
>> replaced with a functionally equivalent silicon computer?
>>
>
> As someone who's worked on this concept, and seen results in patients
> where this - more or less - was actually done:
>
>
>> A) They wouldn't notice and there would be no change in their
>> subjectivity or objectively observable behavior
>> B) They would notice the change in their subjectivity (perhaps noticing a
>> kind of blindness) but they would function the same as before and not say
>> anything
>> C) They would notice the change and they would complain about being blind
>> but would still be able to function as if they can see
>> D) They would notice and become functionally blind, not able to drive,
>> walk without bumping into things, etc.
>> E) Something else
>>
>
> B.  An attempt is made at "perfectly functionally equivalent" but that
> ideal has not been achieved in practice.  There is enough of a difference
> to notice.  That said, in all cases I've seen so far the difference has
> been an improvement - not something worth complaining about.  (Granted, the
> cases I've seen have been replacing a broken cortex or other such
> component, giving sight to the formerly blind.  The "functional
> equivalence" comes in for those who lost their sight, attempting to restore
> what they had.  While there are degrees of blindness one could slide down
> in theory - it is possible for some legally blind people to become more
> blind - I have not seen this happen when this procedure is done.)  I
> suppose that might be more in the spirit of C, since they might comment on
> and compliment the difference, but by the literal wording of the choices B
> is closest to the observed results.
>
> Then again, in the cases I've seen, the difference was the point of the
> replacement.  But the results observed suggest that perfect replacement
> would not happen even for direct replacement.
>

That's very interesting Adrian. Thanks for sharing your insights.

What would you imagine would be the outcome if the replacement were
"perfectly functionally equivalent" and performed in a normally sighted
person?

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230412/7ad01b95/attachment.htm>