Timeline for Is it possible that non-living systems possess consciousness?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2023 at 9:32 | comment | added | Peter - Reinstate Monica | The last quote from the research project is interesting. It appears that Descartes's famous dictum is still the conceptual rescue anchor when we think about our own mind. I'm particularly pleased because I arrived at the same conclusion in my answer. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 9:26 | comment | added | Peter - Reinstate Monica | @benrg I cannot agree with your first general judgement. Jo's answer quotes several sources and is based on more work in the field than almost all other answers here. That said, I also stumbled over the "neurons" requirement; that may be lacking a bit of fantasy. But if you replace "neurons" by "facilities" you arrive at an obvious (though maybe harder to (dis-)prove) requirement. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 21:05 | comment | added | benrg | This answer seems to be nothing but guesses. What you think of as unconscious processes in the brain may be conscious processes with no ability to communicate that fact to the outside world. There's also no reason to believe that consciousness requires "neurons for information processing"; I'm happy to agree that our brain processes information, but you're assuming your conclusion if you assume that's a necessary element of consciousness. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 19:48 | comment | added | Dcleve | @JoWehler -- this blog, and the one following it, discuss preliminary results which were announced this last summer. elusiveself.wordpress.com/2023/07/20/… Note your paper was written two years ago, so there being preliminary results today is not surprising. I could not tell from the blog if it was only phase 1 results or not. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 19:20 | comment | added | Jo Wehler | @Dcleve If I understand right, then Chalmers won the wine because Koch made a wrong forecast about what will be achieved in neuroscience during the 25 years following 1997. - It looks as if you already have the results from the study, do you? - The definition employed in the study refers to the first-person perspective. Hence I assume, that the definition is restricted to human consciousness. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 19:04 | comment | added | Dcleve | Note also that the definition used by the study does not require that a conscious entity have a thalamus. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 19:02 | comment | added | Dcleve | The first phase of the adversarial study did not support either of the two adversarial theories. nautil.us/… And this led to David Chalmers, who had been betting on both failing based on his dualist thinking, to walk away with a case of fine wine. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 10:34 | comment | added | Scott Rowe | @kutschkem perhaps it should be. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 7:54 | comment | added | kutschkem | @ScottRowe No, because most AI research is not about producing consciousness. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 at 7:41 | history | edited | Jo Wehler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Expanded
|
| Oct 24, 2023 at 2:11 | comment | added | Scott Rowe | Maybe AI research should focus on emulating the actions of the thalamus and cortex? | |
| Oct 23, 2023 at 17:52 | history | edited | Jo Wehler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 206 characters in body
|
| Oct 23, 2023 at 16:34 | history | edited | Jo Wehler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Oct 23, 2023 at 16:25 | history | answered | Jo Wehler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |