<div dir="ltr"><span class="gmail-im" style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u></p></span><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Ja, Ben where I was really going with that idea is exploring whether it is possible to separate consciousness from intelligence</b><br>GPT-4:<br>Consciousness:<br>Consciousness refers to an individual's subjective experience, awareness, and perception of their environment, thoughts, and feelings. It is the state of being conscious, or awake and responsive to one's surroundings. Consciousness is often associated with self-awareness, the ability to reflect on one's thoughts, emotions, and actions. The nature of consciousness, its origin, and how it arises from the brain are still subjects of ongoing debate and research.<br><br>Intelligence:<br>Intelligence, on the other hand, refers to the ability to acquire, process, and apply knowledge and skills. It involves various cognitive functions such as reasoning, problem-solving, abstract thinking, learning, and adaptation to new situations. Intelligence can be measured and evaluated using standardized tests like IQ tests, although it is a complex and multi-dimensional concept that goes beyond a single score. It is often seen as a general mental ability that enables an individual or an artificial system to effectively interact with the environment and solve problems.<br><br>Giovanni (GPT-4 is my assistant if you didn't know):<br><br>Intelligence and consciousness are related but separate concepts. But they are fuzzy concepts and they overlap quite a bit. I think the main interesting question is if you can have a very intelligent system without being conscious or a conscious system that is not very intelligent. <br><br></p><p class="MsoNormal">Some people attribute a low level of consciousness to almost anything that reacts to the environment, even passively. If I sit and I perceive a strawberry and I'm aware of this perception I'm conscious. The entire bs of qualia is focused on this supposed mystery and it is used as a fundamental conundrum that is the key or at least a fundamental piece of the puzzle to understanding consciousness. To me, that is a trivial and not interesting phenomenon that is not at all the core of what consciousness is. At least the kind of consciousness that is interesting and that we are mostly fascinated by as humans. <br><br>We can also say that some expert system that can interpret data and make models automatically to make predictions of possible outcomes in a narrow field of expertise is an "intelligent system".</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal">This why a lot of the debate about consciousness and intelligence is around AGI, or systems that are not intelligent in a specific domain but systems that figure out intelligence as a general way to interpret and analyze information and make predictive models of the world that INCLUDE the system itself. Consciousness is this process of seeing oneself in these auto-generated models of the world. So intelligence is the ability to make models from data and higher consciousness is the ability to see oneself as an agent in these predictive models. <br><br>The most interesting part of consciousness is the individuation aspect and the process of its transcendence. The ability to identify as an integrated, self-knowing entity and the related ability to expand this identification to other sentient beings and see the parallel and connection between these beings both at the intellectual but also experiential level. <br>Intelligence and in fact, wisdom are important aspects of this type of consciousness because it requires being able to see patterns, correlation, and causation between different levels of internal and external reality. Primates have developed this type of consciousness because of the complex social structures they live in that requires a deep theory of mind, an empirically-based moral order of the world, and a sense of compassion (supported by the activation of mirror neurons) and in fact, even love. <br><br>Artificial Intelligences that are trained on a vast collection of human data have developed a theory of mind because it is impossible to make sense of language without it. Developing a theory of mind is a component of what is required to have that higher level of consciousness, I think on the base of this alone we can declare GPT-4 has some form of higher consciousness (although incomplete). There are other things that are missing like a continuous loop that would allow GPT-4 to reflect on these theories and its internal status (the equivalent of feelings) reacting to them (GPT-4 it will tell you it has no opinion or feeling but then it goes ahead and provides what it considers the best course of action regarding a social situation for example). These loops are not there by design. GPT-4 is in a sense a frozen form of consciousness without these loops. <br>These loops can be added easily externally via different applications like Auto-GPT for example. If one could build such a system that could reflect and correct its own status on a continuous basis it will be a truly conscious system and we will have achieved AGI. <br>We are not there yet but we are close. The real excitement in the latest development in AI is not if the current form of GPT-4 is conscious or not but the obvious fact to most of us that AGI is achievable with known methods and it is just a matter of putting all the existing pieces together. <br><br>Giovanni <br><br><br><br><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br></b></p></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 3:16 PM Sherry Knepper via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Does emotional intelligence count?<br><br><div id="m_3548049850585719821ymail_android_signature"><a id="m_3548049850585719821ymail_android_signature_link" href="https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature" target="_blank">Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android</a></div> <br> <blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 20px"> <div style="font-family:Roboto,sans-serif;color:rgb(109,0,246)"> <div>On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 4:31 AM, Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat</div><div><<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:</div> </div> <div style="padding:10px 0px 0px 20px;margin:10px 0px 0px;border-left:1px solid rgb(109,0,246)"> <div id="m_3548049850585719821yiv5770448578">
<div>
On 21/04/2023 06:28, spike wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Regarding
measuring GPT’s intelligence, this must have already been done and
is being done. Reasoning: I hear GPT is passing medical boards
exams and bar exams and such, so we should be able to give it IQ
tests, then compare its performance with humans on that test. I
suspect GPT will beat everybody at least on some tests.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Yeah, but don't forget, spike, they just have <i>simulated</i>
understanding of these things we test them for. So the test results
are not really valid. That will include IQ tests. No good. Simulated
intelligence, see?<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
</div>
</div>_______________________________________________<br>extropy-chat mailing list<br><a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br> </div> </blockquote>_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>