nshepperd comments on Why Bayes? A Wise Ruling - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Vaniver 25 February 2013 03:52PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (116)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 March 2013 05:32:03PM *  1 point [-]

Basically what I asked Eliezer: What sense of the word "sentient" is he using, such that babies plausibly don't qualify? My de facto read of the term and a little digging around Google show two basic senses:

-Possessing sensory experiences (I'm pretty sure insects and even worms do that)
-SF/F writer's term for "assume this fictional entity is a person" (akin to "sapient"; it's a binary personhood marker, or a secularized soul -- it tells the reader to react accordingly to this character's experiences and behavior)

The latter, applied to the real world, sounds rather more like "soul" than anything coherent and obvious. The former, denied in babies, sounds bizarre and obviously untrue. So...I'm missing something, and I'd like to know what it is.

Comment author: nshepperd 06 March 2013 10:52:44PM 1 point [-]

-Possessing sensory experiences (I'm pretty sure insects and even worms do that)

Are you claiming that insects and worms possess functioning sense-organs, or that they possess subjective experience of the resulting sense-data? I find the latter somewhat unlikely wrt insects and worms. Regarding babies, it doesn't seem "obviously untrue" to me that babies lack subjective experience. Though, nor does it seem obviously true.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 March 2013 10:56:32PM 1 point [-]

Are you claiming that insects and worms possess functioning sense-organs, or that they possess subjective experience of the resulting sense-data?

I'm trying to figure out why you think there's a difference between the two, at least when dealing with anything possessing a nervous system.

Comment author: nshepperd 06 March 2013 11:03:50PM 0 points [-]

A nervous system is just a lump of matter, the same as any other. Another object with functioning sense-organs is my laptop, yet I wouldn't say my laptop possesses subjective experience.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 March 2013 11:29:50PM 0 points [-]

A nervous system is just a lump of matter, the same as any other.

So you will have no objection to me replacing your brain with an intricately-carved wooden replica, then?

Another object with functioning sense-organs is my laptop, yet I wouldn't say my laptop possesses subjective experience.

  1. How would you know if it did?

  2. If you don't think a nervous system is relevant there, I'm curious to know what you think is behind you having subjective experiences, and if you believe in p-zombies. Your laptop doesn't organize that sense input and integrate it into a complex system. But even simple organisms do that.

Comment author: nshepperd 07 March 2013 12:29:03AM 2 points [-]

Your response suggests you do understand the distinction between possessing sensory information and subjective experience of the same. As such, I suppose my job here is complete. But nevertheless:

The important thing is not the composition of an object, but its functionality. An intricately-carved wooden machine that correctly carried out the functionality of my brain would be a fine replacement, even if it lacks the elan vital neural matter supposedly has.

My laptop doesn't have subjective experience. You do. An elephant most likely does. What about Watson?. The robots in those robot soccer competitions? Or BigDog?

My opinion on zombies is lw standard.

Comment author: shminux 06 March 2013 11:11:07PM 0 points [-]

I wouldn't say my laptop possesses subjective experience

How would you know if it did?