RE: Will AI ever = conciousness or sentience?
December 1, 2012 at 5:46 am
(This post was last modified: December 1, 2012 at 5:57 am by Edwardo Piet.)
@ the OP.
Yes.
Why not? If life came from "non-life" (or life that is so lifeless that it's virtually and practically "non-life") then why can't conscious and sentient biological life develop into and become sentient and conscious non-biologically mechanical life (and I don't mean mechanical in a "bad" way... mechanisms are more complicated than that. After all, suppose a paradoxical mechanism developed that allowed a mechanism that was both free and orderly?)? There's sexism and there's racism and there's species-ism but how about a new "label"(label (not that there will or won't be more to come)) for a perhaps currently unlabelled but already existent (perhaps) bias/prejudice/dogmatic attitude... or to put it less negatively: Something that perhaps isn't currently understood yet and sadly misleads us into unconsciously avoiding our true potential in this(these) world(s)/universe(s). What should we "label" this problem that there seems to seem to be to me to me to me? Should we label it positively, negatively or neutrally? Many people seem to seem to (at least in my view) see neutrality itself as hostile... but is it? How can it be if it's truly neutral? And can't it just as easily be friendly if it really can be hostile despite the fact that it's by definition neither? You can't have it both ways and have such balance (unless some supernatural/super-natural miracle (or perhaps logical paradox) was formed (or is forming)).
I would be very happy if some person or persons commented on my point of view, even if I don't get to respond to them because I would, frankly, and honestly, really just want to do my bit and make my mark by giving this stuff of thought some thought and pass on my message in a realistic way that hopefully moves enough sentient beings close enough to the ideal. And I do hope for some more minds trying to connect with my personal interpretation with their own personal interpretation.
Yes.
Why not? If life came from "non-life" (or life that is so lifeless that it's virtually and practically "non-life") then why can't conscious and sentient biological life develop into and become sentient and conscious non-biologically mechanical life (and I don't mean mechanical in a "bad" way... mechanisms are more complicated than that. After all, suppose a paradoxical mechanism developed that allowed a mechanism that was both free and orderly?)? There's sexism and there's racism and there's species-ism but how about a new "label"(label (not that there will or won't be more to come)) for a perhaps currently unlabelled but already existent (perhaps) bias/prejudice/dogmatic attitude... or to put it less negatively: Something that perhaps isn't currently understood yet and sadly misleads us into unconsciously avoiding our true potential in this(these) world(s)/universe(s). What should we "label" this problem that there seems to seem to be to me to me to me? Should we label it positively, negatively or neutrally? Many people seem to seem to (at least in my view) see neutrality itself as hostile... but is it? How can it be if it's truly neutral? And can't it just as easily be friendly if it really can be hostile despite the fact that it's by definition neither? You can't have it both ways and have such balance (unless some supernatural/super-natural miracle (or perhaps logical paradox) was formed (or is forming)).
I would be very happy if some person or persons commented on my point of view, even if I don't get to respond to them because I would, frankly, and honestly, really just want to do my bit and make my mark by giving this stuff of thought some thought and pass on my message in a realistic way that hopefully moves enough sentient beings close enough to the ideal. And I do hope for some more minds trying to connect with my personal interpretation with their own personal interpretation.
