Re: Perceptual symbol systems

From: Traveler (traveler_at_nospam.com)
Date: 08/11/04 

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:13:19 -0400

In article <42c8441.0408110359.1b38ffc2@posting.google.com>,
dralexgreen@yahoo.co.uk (Alex Green) wrote:

>Traveler <traveler@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<aodih01eokk72albi9cfh1c5v70e778vb6@4ax.com>...
>> In article <4118d6a5$1_4@news.athenanews.com>, "Sergio Navega"
>> <snavega@intelliwise.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Traveler" <traveler@nospam.com> escreveu na mensagem
>> [cut]
>> I do. But I guess this is because I keep seeing the problem from the
>> point of view of the intelligence itself, and not from that of the
>> observer, which is irrelevant to the intelligence.
>
>This is an excellent point. The link between AI and conscious
>observation is a prejudice that results from a belief in strong AI.

True. There is no link between intelligence and consciousness. One can
exist without the other.

>(See:
>http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~lka/strongai.htm )
>
>It is quite possible that conscious observation is advantageous in an
>AI system but conscious observation is not due to AI.

I agree. Strong AI (the kind that claims that consciousness is an
emergent property of intelligent system) is a form of religious
superstition, IMO. It is a religion whose only aim is to discredit
other religions.

>I have never seen a theory of strong AI that derives the
>characteristics of conscious observation from the properties of an
>information system.

Indeed. They have no clue as to the nature of consciousness. So how
can they formulate a theory that derives it?

> Information systems deliver content, they do not possess the phenomenon
> of conscious observation.

Consciousness is one of the things that scientists cannot fathom. Why?
Because it is beyond the scientific method: it cannot be measured with
an instrument. Yet, it is a phenomenon that cannot be denied. It is a
big thorn on their side. They can't ignore it and they can't take it
out. So they run around in circles repeating incantations to see if
the pain will go away. It never does.

>It is customary for
>proponents of strong AI to dismiss human conscious experience as an
>'illusion' yet still to lay claim to possessing an explanation for all
>conscious experience. Technologists who are excessively proud of their
>creations often believe them to be capable of 'mind', the master
>potters of Ancient Greece also thought their statues just needed a
>breath of 'emergentism' to make them alive.

Yes. I like the analogy. Proponents of strong AI are image
worshippers. They strongly wish for the image to be the real thing and
in their minds it may be the real thing. But the rest of us with a
head on shoulders, we know better. Strong AI is just another chicken
*** religion, IMO. Pardon my metaphor.

Louis Savain

Artificial Intelligence From the Bible:
http://users.adelphia.net/~lilavois/Seven/bible.html

Falsifiable Predictions:
http://users.adelphia.net/~lilavois/Seven/predictions.html

Quantcast