Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!comp.vuw.ac.nz!am.dsir.govt.nz!marcamd!mercury!fivegl!carl
From: carl@fivegl.co.nz (Carl Reynolds)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Conciousness
Message-ID: <1991May3.000537.7686@fivegl.co.nz>
Date: 3 May 91 00:05:37 GMT
References: <2102@seti.inria.fr> <PJA.91Apr26104155@neuron.cis.ohio-state.edu> <2124@seti.inria.fr> <11611@uwm.edu>
Reply-To: carl@fivegl.co.nz (Carl Reynolds)
Organization: 5GL International Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand
Lines: 48

In article <2124@seti.inria.fr> ziane@nuri.inria.fr (ziane mikal @) writes:
)> I can easily immagine an intelligent computer and I can also immagine
)> a computer with a conciousness. However I have some difficulty to immagine
)> a computer having pain. I have some difficulty to understand what it means.

In article <11611@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:
]> So it's not whether it experiences pain or not, it's whether it knows it's
]> experiencing pain or not.  Pain won't even bother me, a fully cognizant and
]> intelligent being, if I don't know it's there (like when under anaesthesia).

I would say that if you're under anaesthesia then you don't *have* any pain!

Perhaps we haven't quite defined what we mean by "pain".

Often we refer to pain as the reaction of our nerves to physical damage, but
I can also suffer "emotional pain" which can cause me to behave in a similar
manner as I would when experiencing "nerve" pain. (eg. shedding tears)

I would say that pain is not a physical state; rather just our way of
interpreting how we feel.  I would find it very difficult to imagine a
computer having pain as we would have pain, since its evaluation of itself
is very unlikely to mirror the human evaluation.  It might find certain
states "distasteful", but is it in pain?  It depends what you call it.
You experience discontent for your current situation - where does discontent
stop and pain begin?  Its just semantics, or your own interpretation at best.

Hey, if a computer whines, whimpers and tells me that its floppy drive
hurts I'll think its in pain. That's because I, like most people, tend
to anthropomorphise - ow, I think I just broke something :). To treat
animals and objects as though they were human, anyway. I am unlikely
to comprehend how it *feels* (not vb), since it does not feel (vb) the
same way I feel (vb). The best I can do with my limited language is to
say that its in pain.

Now the closer we get to having programs that duplicate our method of
thinking, the closer a computer's pain will match our own - that's if
our intention is to provide a computer with human pain! Its a bit hard
to do this without a human body. (And ok, we can give contentment too,
no problem).

]> What makes us different from objects is only that we have sufficient
]> intelligence and self-awareness to see that part that pervades us.

Agreed.

To map an emotional state such misery onto a computer simulation is easy.
To make the computer actually care whether or not it is miserable is
considerably more difficult.