[comp.ai.philosophy] Testing for [] consciousness

robiner@oberon.usc.edu (10/19/90)

In article <MIKEB.90Oct16133635@wdl31.wdl.fac.com> mikeb@wdl31.wdl.fac.com (Michael H Bender) writes:
>In article <31@tdatirv.UUCP> sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>
>   >>In short, I think the distinction you are making between 'machine' 
>   >>and 'human' is largely artificial, it is based on a false 
>
>
>Likewise, the arguments "proving" the possibility of constructing
>consciousness are equally flawed! (By the way -- how can we build something
>we can't even define?)
>

Let's look at it another way.  Suppose I tell you that the material making
up my brain is not the same as yours.  Unless this premise alone is enough
to prove I lack consciousness, nothing else objective is left.

So, prove I lack consciousness.  Maybe I do, maybe I don't, but it's
all subjective anyway.  Why not let another machine decide if a machine
has consciousness.  (btw, that's what the space shuttle computers do!)

=steve= 

mikeb@wdl31.wdl.fac.com (Michael H Bender) (10/20/90)

> In article <27608@usc.edu> robiner@oberon.usc.edu writes:
>
>   In article <MIKEB.90Oct16133635@wdl31.wdl.fac.com> 
>	mikeb@wdl31.wdl.fac.com (Michael H Bender) writes:
>    >In article <31@tdatirv.UUCP> sarima@tdatirv.UUCP 
>		(Stanley Friesen) writes:
>   >
>   >   >>In short, I think the distinction you are making between 'machine' 
>   >   >>and 'human' is largely artificial, it is based on a false 
>   >
>   >
>   >Likewise, the arguments "proving" the possibility of constructing
>   >consciousness are equally flawed! (By the way - how can we build something
>   >we can't even define?)
>   >
>
>   Let's look at it another way.  Suppose I tell you that the material making
>   up my brain is not the same as yours.  Unless this premise alone is enough
>   to prove I lack consciousness, nothing else objective is left.
>
>   So, prove I lack consciousness.  Maybe I do, maybe I don't, but it's
>   all subjective anyway.  Why not let another machine decide if a machine
>   has consciousness.  (btw, that's what the space shuttle computers do!)
>
>   =steve= 

I agree whole-heartedly -- either we can come up with a useful definition
of consciousness, or else we should stop arguing whether machines can or
can't have "it". 

However, that does not mean that we should ignore the subject. I think it
would be very useful to come up with a meaningful definition of
consciousness (or at least human consciousness) because (1) It believe it
plays a critical part in our intelligence and (2) By understanding it, we
may improve our understanding of how computers can be used effectively. 

Mike Bender