This is What Consciousness is:

Author: Reece101

Posts

Total: 78
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 8,913
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
-->
@Reece101
Yep. Very interesting.

ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,241
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
@Reece101
@Sidewalker
SW...It is not a “process,” nor is it a set of “functions.”, it is the conceptual space within which we find the objects of thought.
" conceptual space " = Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego { identity }.

Reec...You’re using consciousness synonymously with soul.

Biologic = soul with consciousness, with most complex soul human woman, having potential access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego { * i  * }

Algorithms = soul/biologic-like processes that attempt to mimic soul/biologic-like consciousness that understands, but does not comprehend a greater wholistic set of inter-relationhships that can only come from biologic/soul experience.

Ex a woman giving birth and the hormonal interactions with the rest of her biologic/soul, the fetus and those around her, that produce feeling experiences and some comprehension of a greater connection with that which exists outside of herself.

Do any here really believe we will see algorithmic processes giving birth to a complex algorithm, that, will every experience this more comprehensive set of inter-relations a of a biologic birth and resultant experiential feelings?

Isnt this what Star Treks data was always missing.  A comprehensive feelings of a greater wholistic set, that, n binds us all as one and also gives our spirit of hope, purpose, love, faith, adventure, mysterys, imagination and the desire to know more.

1}  simple mineral >>> to >>complex evolution of woman biologic/soul giving birth to that with equal potential to similar complexity

2} Biologic >>> complex >> to simple evolution via inbreeding and loss of Meta-space access to a greater , complexity { syntropy } that  comprehnds a greater wholistic set of inter-relationships, that, pertains to the environmental circumstances that sustain all biologic/souls, and their result programming algorithms

3} Simple Algorithm programing >>> accumulating information >>> with with no grasp experiential feelings of a greater wholistic comprehension inter-relationships to self, others and the environment that sustains them all.

A person who mimics another person never has the wholness { completness } of the person there attempting to mimic.

An algorythimic attempts to mimic the experiential learning process of biologic/soul, yet it will never exist as  the more complex biologic/soul or create a biologic/soul with most complex woman having access to  ?( * i  * )?  and ability to give birth from their body, to another equally complex biologic/soul
  

49 days later

Math_Enthusiast
Math_Enthusiast's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 9
0
0
4
Math_Enthusiast's avatar
Math_Enthusiast
0
0
4
I'm shocked that no one has a notion of consciousness remotely similar to mine. I think it's fair to say that we are trying to define consciousness here. The proposed definition involving energetic reactions is weak at best. What if I just throw a bunch of reactants together? If I throw together enough, does a consciousness at the level of our own eventually pop up? Perhaps this will be responded to with "It isn't about amount, it's about complexity!" What makes a system of reactions more "complex" then? It seems to me like we're back where we started.

Now regarding the "experience realm." What is the experience realm? This seems ill-defined to me. We experience things in two ways: Our senses, and our thoughts. Does this mean that a low level AI with a camera would be a better contender for artificial consciousness than a high level AI with no camera, because the former has an additional channel to the "experience realm?" If you argue that this AI doesn't actually "experience" the data coming in through its camera, then this comes back to my point about this being ill-defined. What would it mean for it to "experience" this?

My notion of consciousness has three criteria which I will elaborate upon in a moment:

1. It thinks.
2. It understands its thoughts.
3. It is self-aware.

These, like the "experience realm," are, without further elaboration, completely ill-defined, so I will now explain what each of them mean more specifically.

It thinks: I will be using the analogy of an AI throughout my explanation. Picture an AI which you can ask any question, and get an answer. How it obtains this answer, or even the correctness of the answer are irrelevant. All it needs to do is give you some sort of answer. For this criterion, the AI needs to have some sort of internal "thought process" as it reaches the answer. An AI which just sends the question to google and gets back an answer does not think. An AI that first analyzes the question, then goes to google to find relevant information, and then comes back with an answer would be said to think. As you can see, thinking is actually a rather weak criterion. It is the next two criteria that are the critical ones.

It understands its thoughts: Consider the example of a thinking AI. What if you asked it to explain how it comes to its answers? It would probably research its own program, and then come back with an answer. It would not be able to tell you simply based off of its "understanding" of how it is obtaining its answers. Imagine now an AI which has another layer of processing. At each step it not only performs the step, but also understands the step, and can change it to best suite the question. This is where some humanoid characteristics start emerging. Such an AI could potentially learn from mistakes, contemplate things independent from human interaction, and more. There are some AIs a lot like this, and yet we still consider them to only be giving the illusion of consciousness, not to be truly conscious. What they need to get there is the third and final criterion.

It is self-aware: We have officially reached HAL 9000. Observe how each step so far adds one more "layer of consciousness." This AI adds a third layer of understanding and analysis to the other two. It understands its own existence, thoughts, and understanding of its thoughts. The last criterion only requires understanding of its own thought process. It now understands itself.  This AI has the ability to change its learning style, change its goals, and to plan. While the previous AI could change its process, this one can change the way in which it changes its process. It has the potential to learn new skills without human intervention, and to quickly adapt to new situations. This no longer sounds like any sort of illusion of consciousness, this is consciousness.

Finally, a few last comments on these criteria. I call an entity satisfying the first two criteria partially sentient. There are certainly partially sentient AIs out there today. There are not, however, (as far as we know) any completely sentient AIs, and if we want to create one, we will need to have a good understanding of criterion three. Finally, note that these criteria have a pattern of adding another "layer" each time. In this sense, one could imagine a fourth criterion. I call an entity satisfying further criteria in this pattern of layering ultrasentient. (In case you hadn't gathered from the past paragraph, I like having terminology for things.) Anyway, I feel that a have to thank anyone who made it through this entire post for listening to my ramblings! I hope you got something out of this!
b9_ntt
b9_ntt's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 126
0
2
5
b9_ntt's avatar
b9_ntt
0
2
5
-->
@zedvictor4
I agree with zedvictor4’s post #6.
Consciousness is a simulation of an assumed reality, derived from incoming sensory signalling via an energized organic substrate.
According to Thomas Metzinger ( The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind & the Myth of the Self), the human brain creates a model of the world around us. We cannot experience the world directly, but only through our perceptions as processed by our brain. “Consciousness is the appearance of a world. ... a single and unified reality ….” It is a representation of our world, and the fact that this representation is transparent to us, enables us to think of it as “reality.”

The human brain also creates a “self,” a mental model of the organism as a whole. The myth of a real self emerges from this process because the fact that it is a model is transparent to us, much like a fish supposedly not knowing that it lives in water.



ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,241
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Reece101
You’re using consciousness synonymously with soul.

Biologic = soul and woman is most complex entity of Universe ---barring ideas of two or more women, man and woman, black hole or Universeppp   and most complex biologic of Universe that we know of.

There exist degrees of consciousness ---...' twoness, other-ness, awareness'.. Bucky Fuller

O O = twoness and typically we say some minimal lines-of-relationship between ex Gravitational would be the mininum ergo O---O, however, I think it more accurate to to represent that line-of-relationship this way (O)(  )(  )(  )(O) wherein the outer geodesics { in bold } are Gravity.

This above is three-ness and the background of rest of Universe and what exists outside of Universe is the background context within which the three-ness exists ergo total four-ness.

So we varying degrees of particles and their relationships as consciousness, until eventually we come to the combinations and the synergy of biologic/soul aka biologic life.

Again, we have varying degrees of consciousness --simple worm nematode being simplest--, until we get to most complex, the bilateral { *  * }, female woman and her and mans access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego/i

......space(> * <) i  (> * <)space..... i = ego identity via more complex human nervous system

i = Meta-space

Primary set of two kinds of complexity: 1} numerical ex some salmanders have much more genetic material per cell than humans, 2} synergetic complexity ex humans access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts.

Syntropy is coming together as orderly integral whole

Entropy is the dissipating apart of a whole ergo decay, chaos, dis-sorder etc
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,691
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@b9_ntt
The human brain also creates a “self,” a mental model of the organism as a whole. The myth of a real self emerges from this process because the fact that it is a model is transparent to us, much like a fish supposedly not knowing that it lives in water.
I think they know to a limited extent. It’s like saying mammals didn’t know about gravity until a few hundred years ago.
Though i’m not saying fish have the cognitive ability to fully grasp it. Though you’d be surprised how smart some fish are.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,517
3
4
7
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
7
-->
@b9_ntt
Scientists differ on the degree to which fish can have consciousness. Some researchers argue that they cannot have consciousness as their brain is simple, lacking a cerebral cortex, and they have little capacity for learning and memory, a very simple behavioural repertoire and no ability to experience suffering. Others contest this view, pointing out that, despite the small size of the fish brain, detailed morphological and behavioural analyses have highlighted homologies between some of their brain structures and those seen in other vertebrates, such as the hippocampus (linked to learning and spatial memory) and the amygdala (linked to emotions) of mammals.
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,892
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Anything that can feel anything is conscious. This is the least definition of consciousness, and it marks the beginning of intelligence. Being able to feel and respond intelligently to stimuli enables greater adaptability and the birth of consciousness. And also the death of instinct, which is of the automata.

Of course it gets a whole lot more complicated than that, but that's consciousness.  
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,892
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
As to what intelligence is, I'd say we've cracked that. Human intelligence is an enormity of competing neural nets. It's the feeling that I think we'll never crack. Attempts at AGI put the cart before the horse. The human body is a wonderland of an environment billions of years in the making which we won't simulate for any learning agent. 
b9_ntt
b9_ntt's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 126
0
2
5
b9_ntt's avatar
b9_ntt
0
2
5
-->
@badger
If feeling is awareness, then I agree with you.
An AI could be aware of its inner & outer activities, and its experience would be qualitatively different from that of a human. That difference should not be the criteria for consciousness, because the two kinds of brains are differently embodied. Humans seem to think that the quality of their feelings are an important part of consciousness. I don't think so.
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,892
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@b9_ntt
Humans seem to think that the quality of their feelings are an important part of consciousness.
An AI is only as good as the data it's trained on. Quality and quantity of data is obviously important.
b9_ntt
b9_ntt's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 126
0
2
5
b9_ntt's avatar
b9_ntt
0
2
5
-->
@badger
I understand that.
I still would like to know whether you think that feeling is equivalent to awareness.
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,892
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@b9_ntt
I still would like to know whether you think that feeling is equivalent to awareness.

More or less. I think intelligence is an illusion or an outgrowth of feeling. I think feeling arises in an organism as a way to measure concerns. I mean, it's surely all very complicated and I don't have all the answers, but this is my intuition. I feel a thousand things right now. I feel each of these words I'm writing on the tip of my tongue. Some of them even have shape. I am my tongue pressed to the top of my mouth. I am the breath behind it. Honestly, I think I'm just some sort of mediation neural net. I'll force the hand to touch the hot thing if we need to. Otherwise it works on its own intelligence. 
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,892
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
The human brain also creates a “self,” a mental model of the organism as a whole. The myth of a real self emerges from this process because the fact that it is a model is transparent to us, much like a fish supposedly not knowing that it lives in water.
This reminds me of "This is Water" by DFW. Read it recently to my girlfriend and made her cry. It's a pretty speech. 
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,517
3
4
7
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
7
-->
@Reece101

We have consciousness because There are about 1 billion neurons in the human brain and each of these neurons has 1,000 other connections with other neurons accounting to more than trillions of connections.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,241
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@FLRW
@Math_Enthusiast
Scientists differ on the degree to which fish can have consciousness.
Them and others are confusing consciousness with access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego.

Math_E....1. It thinks.....2. It understands its thoughts....3. It is self-aware.
I.e.  biologic/soul life as animals if not also less complex biologic/soul life.

Fuller states it this way, unity is plural and at a minimum two.
Minimal consciousness entails twoness ergo other-ness ergo awareness { paraphasing fuller } as follows:

1} O.....O twoness, I think about my occupied space finger { O }, with my occupied space brain { O } via sight { EMRadiation }, or sound { tapping }, smell { nasty }, taste { sweet },

2} O----O three-ness via line-of-relationship --see above 1 scenarios of senses--- or as Gravity  (   )  as geodesic lines-of-realtionship between the two ex (O)(   )(   )(   )(O),

3} four-ness via the background context { ..... }, by within which the above takes place ex  ........(O)(   )(   )(   )(O)........

Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,691
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@FLRW
We have consciousness because There are about 1 billion neurons in the human brain and each of these neurons has 1,000 other connections with other neurons accounting to more than trillions of connections.
From a quick search; in an adult there’s about 100 billion neurons in total with many thousands of connections each.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,540
4
3
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
3
10
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Just wanted to say I've read #63, several times, since you've posted it.

I'm not sure why I don't have anything to say to it.