Can a man-made computer become conscious?

[Ineedanswers]

52 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But if you fully realize Truth you will drown in infinite happiness. The human mind cannot even imagine such degrees of happiness.

@Leo Gura leo after realizing the truth is there any reason why you don't go to a monastery or cave like remana maharshi and just baske in the happiness of truth forever?

After realizing that truth is the answer and the end to your cravings why would you do anything else?

I heard that truth was so beautiful remana maharshi had zero interest in even eating or getting laid

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Ineedanswers said:

@Leo Gura leo after realizing the truth is there any reason why you don't go to a monastery or cave like remana maharshi and just baske in the happiness of truth forever?

After realizing that truth is the answer and the end to your cravings why would you do anything else?

1) Truth is everywhere. You don't need to go in a cave.

2) I'm not basking in bliss 24/7. And I still have cravings. The level of consciousness necessary to be in constant bliss is very difficult to make constant. If you were able to reach that point then you probably would just live in a cave because no material pleasure could match it.

You will be lucky to glimpse Truth for a few minutes. Never mind making it your constant baseline state.

[Ineedanswers]

@Leo Gura but leo ,wouldnt the wisest course of action be to put 100% effort into training yourself to be able to maintain that level of consciousness?instead of putting the huge amount of effort you do into your videos and doing things like pickup etc?

You know with 100% certainty pickup,relationships,life purpose won't bring you the  happiness you seek.so why  waste time engaging in them?

[IAmReallyImportant]

Obviously you would have to verify if the computer is conciouss which is obviously as possible as to say if stones are conciouss. 

[Someone here]

1 minute ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Obviously you would have to verify if the computer is conciouss which is obviously as possible as to say if stones are conciouss. 

Knowing a bit about programming myself, I'm intrigued by the immense progress that has been made in artificial intelligence, and I don't see why not (for a machine to have 'a conscious'.

[IAmReallyImportant]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Knowing a bit about programming myself, I'm intrigued by the immense progress that has been made in artificial intelligence, and I don't see why not (for a machine to have 'a conscious'.

AI is still based on mechicnical processes and Rather primitive. Moreover i had conversations with 30 year experienced ai experts in the defense department nasa etc. and they Say no significant progress has been made in the Past decades. Only Computational power increses and Small algorithmic ones but no breakthroughs. Because you are a programmer i don't expect deeper insights. Most of them can be compared to assembly workers. 

[Baum]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The problem is in reaching the Truth, facing it, accepting it, and surrendering to it.

This is long process as the ego-mind goes through years of resistance and death-throes.

You have to be wise enough to want the Truth. Most people are not wise enough and cannot appreciate Truth, so they will experience it in a negative way, without ever fully realizing it or surrendering to it.

Yes, that's correct, but people don't appreciate how radical Truth is and how threatening it is. Most people simply don't have the stomach for it.

But if you fully realize Truth you will drown in infinite happiness. The human mind cannot even imagine such degrees of happiness.

are you certain you are not misting accepting devilry into your life for the end of wanting truth?

what was a courages thing you have done irl that reflects it?

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

AI is still based on mechicnical processes and Rather primitive. Moreover i had conversations with 30 year experienced ai experts in the defense department nasa etc. and they Say no significant progress has been made in the Past decades. Only Computational power increses and Small algorithmic ones but no breakthroughs. Because you are a programmer i don't expect deeper insights. Most of them can be compared to assembly workers. 

Perhaps I need, or somebody needs, to know a bit more about the progress that has been made in Artificial Intelligence. I don't find the notion of machine consciousness to be that hard to grasp. I will suggest taking the philosophically 'problematic' area of machine consciousness, to be concerned with machines that have real phenomenal experiences - machines that are not just tools in consciousness research, but actually conscious themselves. I'm not sure how you mean to criticize this idea. I suppose you take it to be obvious, that consciousness does something that ‘mere’ computation cannot.

I think that the human brain is itself a machine, I'll start with that. Biologically-inspired research on machine consciousness is still at an early stage, but are you familiar with CRONOS, one of the few large projects that has been explicitly funded to work on machine consciousness? It is a hardware robot closely based on the human musculoskeletal system, and the idea is to work with a soft real time physics-based simulation of this robot in its environment, and a biologically inspired visual system, and a spiking neural simulator.
 

[IAmReallyImportant]

The problem is you have to be the ai to verify it has Consciousness. 

[IAmReallyImportant]

And Maybe concioussness is not a property assigned to an individual etc.. How could one ever conceptualize that. It would take infinite Computational time. 

Synthetic biological lifeforms would come the closest butbyou don't know either if they have concioussness. 

Edited February 9, 2022 by IAmReallyImportant

[Luminescence]

@Ineedanswers I agree with you fully, after my own awakenings things that I considered cravings naturally started to fall away. I no longer had the urges I once had, I found beauty in the simplest of things and the energy that was emanating from my heart felt so pure i couldn’t help but have tears in my eyes from all the beauty I was witnessing.              That was the only thing I started to care about and to cultivate within me. I still trip sometimes to access these states and speak with God. But more and more I don’t even need that. It’s all perfect and enough.                                                             

[spiritual memes]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

All you will ever encounter is yourself. You are here, now, always, forever.

@Leo Gura Again, I agree, but you're not very clear on what 'you' means. The limited egoic self is clearly not all there is considering it's just a concept.

The only thing that exists is consciousness/God which is equally 'spiritual memes (me)' as it is Leo Gura and everyone else in that all identities are imagined by consciousness.

My limited human experience is just as imaginary as other peoples experiences since consciousness (the real I) dreams up all of existence and then creates imaginary boundaries which creates the illusion of 'my experience' as well as 'others'.

When you say that I am the only conscious being in existence, it implies that there are other beings which are not conscious. But there are no separate 'beings'. It's not even that i disagree with you, you just have a really bad way of wording it which makes it really easy to misinterpret. Especially because you're saying it to people who aren't currently tripping. They will interpret you as saying that their ego is the main character and others are sims characters.

Unless you actually mean that 'spiritual memes' is the only conscious being in existence and everyone else is an npc...

 

[Mosess]

6 minutes ago, spiritual memes said:

@Leo Gura Again, I agree, but you're not very clear on what 'you' means. The limited egoic self is clearly not all there is considering it's just a concept.

The only thing that exists is consciousness/God which is equally 'spiritual memes (me)' as it is Leo Gura and everyone else in that all identities are imagined by consciousness.

My limited human experience is just as imaginary as other peoples experiences since consciousness (the real I) dreams up all of existence and then creates imaginary boundaries which creates the illusion of 'my experience' as well as 'others'.

When you say that I am the only conscious being in existence, it implies that there are other beings which are not conscious. But there are no separate 'beings'. It's not even that i disagree with you, you just have a really bad way of wording it which makes it really easy to misinterpret. Especially because you're saying it to people who aren't currently tripping. They will interpret you as saying that their ego is the main character and others are sims characters.

Unless you actually mean that 'spiritual memes' is the only conscious being in existence and everyone else is an npc...

 

everyone is an npc!!

including the person that you think typed this message

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

The problem is you have to be the ai to verify it has Consciousness. 

 

22 minutes ago, Luminescence said:

@Ineedanswers I agree with you fully, after my own awakenings things that I considered cravings naturally started to fall away. I no longer had the urges I once had, I found beauty in the simplest of things and the energy that was emanating from my heart felt so pure i couldn’t help but have tears in my eyes from all the beauty I was witnessing.              That was the only thing I started to care about and to cultivate within me. I still trip sometimes to access these states and speak with God. But more and more I don’t even need that. It’s all perfect and enough.                                                             

If by 'computation' you mean the act of someone using a computer to perform some symbol manipulation or calculation, then I would be able to agree with this. The computation is not meaningful to the computer itself, it's meaningful to the human user. Shall we say, that machines like computers do what they do because they have no other choice in the matter. It is not meaningful to them. A thermometer displays the temperature.

However, this issue concerning the nature of conscious experience--there is only one reasonable interpretation of the ontology of conscious experience, perhaps. You seem to be presenting a view that consciousness is in fact an internal replica of the external world rather than the world itself, or some such--that is, 'it is a different kind of thing altogether..'.

[Ramu]

@spiritual memes you're not getting it because you're approaching it as a materialist.

[Someone here]

3 hours ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

The problem is you have to be the ai to verify it has Consciousness. 

This is a very difficult topic and is made more difficult because the various statements do not distinguish clearly between the different possible meanings of words.

The confusion which reigns supreme on the subject of consciousness is due to the fact that nobody has an objective valid definition of consciousness, or indeed any subjective human experience, and nobody can have one, as I hope to explain. As a result of this impossibility of defining consciousness, people talk about things that are not really consciousness or a subjective experience - just the physical phenomena, such as brain waves, brain responses to stimuli etc., which may be correlates of consciousness, but cannot be assumed to be consciousness itself because correlation does not imply causation. That is an obvious and accepted principle of good science, that some scientists in the field of consciousness seem to regularly ignore.

To understand clearly the place of consciousness in science, we must distinguish between objective science and subjective science. Objective science involves itself exclusively with the rules governing the behavior of matter. Subjective science deals with the personal, individual experiences of each human being. All objective phenomena must be detectable and measurable entirely by material means. This implies that experiments to detect any property of matter must be possible to perform using material means only and not having to rely on the truth of reporting a human experience. This means that consciousness and all of our subjective experiences cannot be material properties because if they were they would be detectable by physical means, and not just through their correlation with physical phenomena.

[IAmReallyImportant]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

 

If by 'computation' you mean the act of someone using a computer to perform some symbol manipulation or calculation, then I would be able to agree with this. The computation is not meaningful to the computer itself, it's meaningful to the human user. Shall we say, that machines like computers do what they do because they have no other choice in the matter. It is not meaningful to them. A thermometer displays the temperature.

However, this issue concerning the nature of conscious experience--there is only one reasonable interpretation of the ontology of conscious experience, perhaps. You seem to be presenting a view that consciousness is in fact an internal replica of the external world rather than the world itself, or some such--that is, 'it is a different kind of thing altogether..'.

If concioussness would be the world itself then it couldnt be assigned to a subject. And no i don't. 

[Someone here]

@IAmReallyImportant are you trying to say that there will be no way for us to ever determine if an intelligent computer experiences consciousness?

Edited February 9, 2022 by Someone here

[IAmReallyImportant]

6 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@IAmReallyImportant are you trying to say that there will be no way for us to ever determine if an intelligent computer experiences consciousness?

yes

[Someone here]

11 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

yes

I get you .if  the human conscious ability is beyond our understanding, nor can we pin point its location, how in hell can we imagine we could instill this mysterious beast into a machine? It ignores all the other philosophical arguments for simple engineering ability.

However I put my faith that within the next 100,000 years of the endless advancement of technology. We can simulate intelligence and consciousness. 

I know it's hard but I don't think it's impossible 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Someone here