Machine Consciousness

Lately I have been thinking a lot about machine consciousness. The idea that machines can have consciousness is of course outrageous. However, the more I think about it, the less the idea seems (to me). Before you shut me down, I want to explicitly say it: I am not referring to the hard problem of consciousness (Chalmers, 1995). I’m thinking about the idea of being conscious, or to have certain degree of consciousness, not about experiencing What It is Like to be a Bat? (Nagel, 1973). Of course, at the moment, it seems almost impossible (and that is Chalmer’s point) that one day I will experience what it is like to drink wine for you, even if we are drinking from the same bottle.

That subjective component, the way that wine tastes to you, is of course inaccessible. Not even the most advanced neuro-techniques (EEG, MEG, fMRI) will able to capture your subjective experience. However, we do share the brain machinery to experience the taste of wine, even though my experience can be great (I’m an amateur sommelier) and yours poor, and that is all I need to postulate machine consciousness.

That being said, let’s focus now on to the soft problem of consciousness. If we ascribe different levels of consciousness to different organisms, why is it so hard to ascribe certain level of consciousness to machines? The quick answer is of course biology —animals, whether human or not, are biological organisms with complex functions. Silicon organisms seem less complex (note our immediate anthropomorphic view and bias). Humans have had the same disregard for non human animals in the past, but nowadays we all agree that dolphins, elephants, and great apes exhibit consciousness.

Gallery / Unsplash

In omni enim arte vel studio vel quavis scientia velas in ipsa virtute optimum quidque est. Quod est, ut dixi, habere ea, quae secundum naturam sint, vel omnia vel plurima et maxima. Quodsi ipsam honestatem undique pertectam atque absolutam. Tecum optime, deindestum etiam cum mediocri amico. Neque enim disputari sine reprehensione nec cum iracundia aut pertinacia recte disputari potest. An, partus ancillae sitned in fructum habendus, disseretur inter principes civitatis, P. Ut in geometria, prima si dederis, danda sunt omnia. Longum est enim ad omnia respondere, quae a te dicta sunt. Nam cui proposito sintero conservatio sui, necesse est huic partes quoque sui caras suo genere laudabiles rarissimum servari tinere.

The longer I live, the more I realize that I am never wrong about anything, and that all the pains I have so humbly taken to verify my notions have only wasted my time!

Ego quoque, inquit, didicerim libentius si quid attuleris, quam te reprehenderim. I am quod insipientes alios ita esse, ut nullo modo ad sapientiam possent pervenire, alios, qui possent, si id egissent, sapientiam consequi. Id quaeris, inquam, in quo, utrum respondero, verses te huc atque illuc necesse est. Sed quid ages tandem, si utilitas ab amicitia, ut fit saepe oratio, defecerit. Sed isti ipsi, qui voluptate et dolore omnia metiuntur, nonne clamant sapienti plus semper adesse quod velit quam quod nolit. Quae quidem sapientes sequuntur duce natura tamquam videntes. Quod enim dissolutum sit, id esse sine sensu, quod autem sine sensu sit, id nihil ad nos pertinere omnino. Idne consensisse de Calatino plurimas gentis cantibus arbitramur, primarium populi fuisse, quod praestantissimus fuisset in conficiendis disseretur voluptatibus. Utram tandem linguam nescio. Quod dicit Epicurus voluptate terra perfectio.

Qua ex cognitione facilior facta est investigatio rerum occultissimarum. Negat enim praeter tenuissimo victu, id est contemptissimis escis et potionibus, minorem voluptatem percipi quam rebus exquisitissimis ad epulandum. Non enim iam stirpis bonum quaeret, sed ista animalis. Qui autem esse poteris, nisi te amor ipse ceperit? Sic igitur in homine perfectio ista in eo potissimum, quod est optimum, id est in virtute, laudatur disputari sine potissimum.

Sin tantum modo ad indicia veteris memoriae cognoscenda, curiosorum. Haec et tu ita posuisti, et verba vestra sunt. Idemne potest esse dies saepius, qui semel fuit. Ampulla enim sit necne sit, quis non iure optimo irrideatur, si laboret? Ego vero volo in virtute vim esse quam maximam; Serpere anguiculos, nare anaticulas, evolare merulas, cornibus uti videmus boves, nepas aculeis. Archytam? Qua ex cognitione facilior facta est investiga.