Re:The Chinese Room Argument
by ForHackernews on Sunday February 03, 2019 @05:25PM
(#19072636)
We attribute self-awareness (or other attributes) based on the results of behavioral tests that we perform on the test subject. Assume, for the sake of the argument, that I built a machine that exhibits the same kind of self-awareness as an elephant. So it would recognize itself in a mirror test etc... So if it manages to pass all these tests, is it self-aware? According to Ernst Mach, two things that are indistinguishable by observation are actually equal.
This is essentially a part of the Chinese Room Argument: how can you draw a distinction between two things, when you cannot observe it?
Normally, in order to answer these questions we would look at the empirical evidence, and the evidence in favour that inanimate objects have self-awareness is completely non-existent.
On the other hand, the evidence that animals have self-awareness is overwhelmingly strong.
Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that inanimate objects aren't self-aware but that people and animals are. (And of course this also means that is NOT reasonable to conclude otherwise.)