You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Pentashagon comments on [LINK] Could a Quantum Computer Have Subjective Experience? - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: shminux 26 August 2014 06:55PM

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

Comments (55)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Pentashagon 27 August 2014 07:38:05AM 1 point [-]

It's interesting that we had a very similar discussion here minus the actual quantum mechanics. At least intuitively it seems like physical change is what leads to consciousness, not simply the possibility or knowledge of change. One possible counter-argument to consciousness being dependent on decoherence is the following: What if we could choose whether or not, and when, to decohere? For example, what if inside Schroedinger's box is a cat embryo that will be grown into a perfectly normal immortal cat if nucleus A decays, and the box will open if nucleus B decays. When the box opens, is there no cat, a conscious cat, or a cat with no previous consciousness? What if B is extremely unlikely to decay but the cat can press a switch that will open the box? It seems non-intuitive that consciousness should depend on what happens in the future, outside your environment.

Comment author: cameroncowan 27 August 2014 09:40:03PM 0 points [-]

I think tying physical change to consciousness is dangerous because that would make things that do not change unconscious or things that stay in a permanent state to lose their consciousness. Indeed we know that atoms are always moving but if we stopped that process would consciousness cease? If I freeze you so you move very slowly does that end the consciousness of your being until things speed up again? How does this work within the mind and soul? How could we stop them and end their consciousness? I don't think you can comprehend consciousness without thinking of it as continuous.

Comment author: Creutzer 28 August 2014 05:54:35PM *  0 points [-]

That commits you to the position that all instances of human unconsciousness are just failure to form memories and do a bunch of other things (like interact with the environment), but the lights are never off, as it were.

Comment author: cameroncowan 28 August 2014 07:43:33PM 0 points [-]

Yes, and people live their whole lives this way, a state of unconscious where they don't do all kinds fo things. There were instances of people being in freeze or not remembering very traumatic events. There are people that have terrible things happen to them and have no memory of it until something triggers. That's why we use EMDR to help those people.