= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nominull comments on Outline of a lower bound for consciousness - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (110)
So if I understand correctly, your basic claim underlying all of this is that a system can be said not to be conscious if its set of beliefs remains equally valid when you switch the labels on some of the things it has beliefs about. I have a few concerns about this point, which you may have already considered, but which I would like to see addressed explicitly. I will post them as replies to this post.
If I am mischaracterizing your position, please let me know, and then my replies to this post can probably be ignored.
What does this all mean physically? You talk about a symbolic reasoning system consisting of logic assertions and such, but any symbolic reasoning system ultimately has to be made out of atoms. How can I look at one lump of atoms and tell that it's a symbolic reasoning system, and another lump and tell that it's just random junk?
You can't, because you can interpret any system as a symbolic reasoning system. You don't need to ask whether a system is a symbolic reasoning system; you need to ask whether it's conscious.