Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!wdl1.wdl.fac.com!wdl1!mikeb From: mikeb@wdl31.wdl.fac.com (Michael H Bender) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: Testing for [] consciousness Message-ID: Date: 19 Oct 90 21:03:10 GMT References: <27608@usc.edu> Sender: root@wdl1.wdl.fac.com (SUPER USER) Organization: Ford Aerospace, Western Development Laboratories Lines: 37 In-Reply-To: robiner@oberon.usc.edu's message of 19 Oct 90 00:05:47 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: wdl31 > In article <27608@usc.edu> robiner@oberon.usc.edu writes: > > In article > 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