Artificial Consciousness Remains Impossible (Part 2)

Re:Artificial Consciousness Remains Impossible (Part 2) by teraflop on Wednesday September 06, 2023 @07:22PM (#37412741)

As far as I can tell, the author seems to be trying to simultaneously use two separate definitions of "consciousness":

1. Something which results in "qualia"

2. Something which arises by a non-mechanistic process

and then is just expecting readers to accept that these two definitions are equivalent. It's the same fatal flaw as the original Chinese Room argument.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Artificial Consciousness Remains Impossible (Part 2) by AnotherGoodName on Wednesday September 06, 2023 @07:41PM (#37412904)

For point 2 anything with real world input is non mechanistic since non determinism propagates.

Eg. A regular computer with a camera that's programmed to do something if a photon hits a certain pixel is non deterministic.

I personally do agree that consciousness probably does have an element of non determinism but I don't think that non determinism needs to come from neurons in the brain. We have a whole bunch of non deterministic inputs, consciousness could well come from that and that's true if computers too. In fact it's pretty well known there's nothing really quantum about human neurons.

[ Parent | on HN ]