[MD] Intellectual and Social

[Krimel]

> [Krimel]
> Actually the Turing test addresses the issue of how we would know that
> someone or something has consciousness.

[John]
Ah well, that clears it all up.  Consciousness rather than self awareness.

You wanna pick the difference between those two apart for me Krimel?

[Krimel]
Actually not, but then I have never heard a really compelling definition of
either one. I just regard them as fuzzy sets.

> [Krimel]
> It was proposed as a way of
> determining whether machine or an artificial intelligence is conscious.
> This does not work for animals or very young children because they cannot 
> speak and the test involves asking questions and evaluating the verbal 
> responses.

[John]
Right.  I wasn't proposing it as a test of self-awareness, I was using it
analogicially to make a point.

[Krimel]
My point was that I don't know of the Turing test actually being used except
in science fiction, the trial of Commander Data and Will Smith talking to
Sonny in I, Robot, etc. But the Mirror Test has been used on many species
including very young members of our own.

> [Krimel]
> And actually it is machines that are getting more humanlike.

[John]
If humans are becoming more machine-like, then it follows that machines are
becoming human.  That's because "human" is a programmably malleable goal to
shoot for.

[Krimel]
I am not sure human's are becoming more machine like. You can sure see that
with the rise of capitalism and the industrial revolution. Chaplin
illustrates this brilliantly in Modern Times. But in many ways the
information revolution allows us to act less machine-like through computer
mediated social activities like this one. It is this use of technology to
enhance and expand human interaction that contributes to the formation of a
cybernetic level.

> [Krimel]
> In fact if one
> were so inclined I think a good case could be made for talking about a
> cybernetic level which is the combination of human and machine
> intelligence.
> You know the sort of thing I mean, online forums, Amazon, Google...
>
[John]
Wikipedia becomes part of our memory banks, just like trees are part of our
breathing apparatus.

[Krimel]
I think the connection is a bit closer than that. Tree may enable me to
breathe by producing oxygen but I do no use a tree in the act of breathing.
When we outsource memory functions to machines, we are able to actively use
those machines to recall things we have forgotten and things we never even
knew before. The internet IS the collective unconscious.

> [John]
> I fail to see how one can have any emotion without a sense of self.  I
> mean, what would that even look like?  And if a creature lost all caring 
> about themselves, they would come to seem like an inanimate object, a cog,

> a non-entity.
>
> [Krimel]
> If a lizard jumped off of a hot stove would that indicate self awareness 
> to you? How does one feel pain or hunger without a sense of self?
>
[John]
If I can galvanize a dead frog into action with electricity, does that imply
self-awareness?    I think not.  I determine self-awareness by the look of
chagrin in the eyes of the struggling beast after the torture is done.

Which lizards don't have.

I freely admit that I have no scientific proof for making this distinction.
I make the distinction for reasons of simplicity and preference.  It's
hypothetical.  And unless I get some rational argument against my
hypothesis, I go with it.

[Krimel]
I don't believe you can galvanize a dead frog to actually jump off a hot
stove. Under the right conditions a live one will do so on its own. Does
this require self awareness or just a fully functioning nervous system?