Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David The paradox is that consciousness comes with qualia, and it seems unreasonable to associate them with a theorem that is true over all space-time. What, for example, for all the theorems representing things that have never actually happened. Do the qualia only 'activate' if the theorem is checked! |
You're oversimplifying with this theorem thing. First of all, the inputs to a brain simulator are incredibly complex, including interactions with arbitrary parts of the external world. Some of the inputs are clearly random.
Second, a computer program is different from the execution of the program. A computer program that blows up my car will not blow up my car if it is sitting on a shelf. I cannot ask a program questions to see whether it passes the Turing test if it is not running.
Third, a computer program is only a complete statement of a theorem if it has no state. If it collects data as it runs, then only the running program can be said to be the whole story.
Quote:
|
In effect, I would argue that a computer with a special architecture is not really a computer as we know it - so you are potentially agreeing with me. Furthermore, my guess is that the special architecture will take 200 years to specify Whichever way, the standard materialist 'explanation' looks somewhat flakey when you attack it this way.
|
The question is: How close do we have to come to building a human brain in order for it to pass the Turing test? If it's impossible, as I think Ian says, then that's pretty interesting. Otherwise it's just a question of accuracy of simulation.
~~ Paul