Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Toaster Ovens and Fridges are self aware?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Toaster Ovens and Fridges are self aware?

    Hi all,

    Right now as I type this a debate has erupted on another forum (you know, the one run by that organisation fronted by that Amusing magician) with the materialists/skeptics/atheists claiming that toaster ovens and fridges are conscious and self-aware.

    (If the mods allow it I'll post a link to the thread.)

    I'd like to to know what folks here - especially the materialists/skeptics/atheists - think of this whole idea of computer consciousness?

    ~
    HypnoPsi

    P.S. To be fair, I should state my position: I think it's nonsense.

    P.P.S Happy New Year.

  • #2
    Hello, HypnoPsi.

    Yes, you can post links to other relevant sites or posts.

    And I don't think my frigde is conscious.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by jacob View Post
      Hello, HypnoPsi.

      Yes, you can post links to other relevant sites or posts.

      And I don't think my frigde is conscious.

      Here's the link:

      Idealists: What does 'physical' mean to you? - Page 15 - JREF Forum

      ... though I imagine that many of the folks here are here (and not over there) for a reason.

      To be honest with you I think I'd rather see this forum grow as a good alternative.

      ~
      HypnoPsi

      Comment


      • #4
        Okay, I'll bite. Yes, toaster ovens and fridges are self-aware.

        Oh wait, I guess we'd better define self-aware first.

        ~~ Paul

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos View Post
          Okay, I'll bite. Yes, toaster ovens and fridges are self-aware.

          Oh wait, I guess we'd better define self-aware first.

          ~~ Paul

          Well, to me, self-awareness is that which I have when I'm not self-aware (e.g. asleep).

          What's your definition of self-awareness in a toaster-oven? Does it include qualitative experience.

          ~
          HypnoPsi

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by HypnoPsi
            Well, to me, self-awareness is that which I have when I'm not self-aware (e.g. asleep).
            Sorry, I don't understand that definition.

            What's your definition of self-awareness in a toaster-oven? Does it include qualitative experience.
            I have no idea whether the toaster has qualitative experience, whatever that might be. I'd say self-awareness means that a thing processes information about itself and uses that information to modify its state and actions.

            ~~ Paul

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos View Post
              Sorry, I don't understand that definition.
              Hmm... something makes me suspect you know exactly the difference between being awake and asleep Paul, but okay, self-awareness is the subjective and qualitative experience of the self.

              I have no idea whether the toaster has qualitative experience, whatever that might be. I'd say self-awareness means that a thing processes information about itself and uses that information to modify its state and actions.
              But do you, as an atheist (yes?), believe in the computational theory of consciousness Computational theory of mind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (or something akin to it)?

              That is, do you believe in consciousness being reducable to physical interactions in such a way that it would allow for machine consciousness?

              ~
              HypnoPsi

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by HypnoPsi
                Hmm... something makes me suspect you know exactly the difference between being awake and asleep Paul, but okay, self-awareness is the subjective and qualitative experience of the self.
                Did you mean:

                Well, to me, self-awareness is that which I don't have when I'm not self-aware (e.g. asleep).

                Because otherwise you said self-awareness is what you have when you're asleep. In any event, the definition is circular.

                But do you, as an atheist (yes?), believe in the computational theory of consciousness Computational theory of mind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (or something akin to it)?
                What atheism and the computational theory of consciousness have to do wiith each other I have no idea. Clearly thought is a form of computation, cuz, like, I can compute things in my mind. Does the CTM mean to say that the feeling of thinking is a form of computation?

                ~~ Paul

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Amaterialist HypnoPsi View Post
                  Hi all,

                  Right now as I type this a debate has erupted on another forum (you know, the one run by that organisation fronted by that Amusing magician) with the materialists/skeptics/atheists claiming that toaster ovens and fridges are conscious and self-aware.

                  (If the mods allow it I'll post a link to the thread.)

                  I'd like to to know what folks here - especially the materialists/skeptics/atheists - think of this whole idea of computer consciousness?
                  Most of the people on there are off their heads. I'd pop over and tell them if I were not banned.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos View Post
                    Okay, I'll bite. Yes, toaster ovens and fridges are self-aware.

                    Oh wait, I guess we'd better define self-aware first.

                    ~~ Paul
                    Aware that you are a self.

                    BTW materialists cannot believe that ovens and fridges are self-aware because they cannot believe in the existence of selves.

                    See my essay.
                    Last edited by Interesting Ian; January 14th, 2009, 07:35 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Interesting Ian
                      Aware that you are a self.
                      So to be self-aware is to be aware that you are a self. What does it mean to be a self? Does it mean to be an individual?

                      ~~ Paul

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos View Post
                        So to be self-aware is to be aware that you are a self. What does it mean to be a self? Does it mean to be an individual?

                        ~~ Paul
                        I explain what a self is in part 3 in this essay.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ian
                          Rather the self is that which has particular conscious experiences, or undergoes particular psychological states. Another way of putting this is to say that our various psychological states, or mind states, are properties of the self rather than constituting the self.
                          In this case, it is even more reasonable to say that a toaster oven has a self.

                          ~~ Paul

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos View Post
                            In this case, it is even more reasonable to say that a toaster oven has a self.

                            ~~ Paul
                            The toaster oven is a self.

                            I have absolutely no idea why you think it is reasonable to suppose a toaster oven is a self!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Amaterialist HypnoPsi View Post
                              Here's the link:

                              Idealists: What does 'physical' mean to you? - Page 15 - JREF Forum

                              ... though I imagine that many of the folks here are here (and not over there) for a reason.

                              To be honest with you I think I'd rather see this forum grow as a good alternative.

                              ~
                              HypnoPsi
                              I've just looked at the first couple of pages of this thread.

                              Remember what I said Paul in the other thread about people using Ockham's principle to justify their own particular metaphysical stance? So I could use Ockham's principle to justify Idealism because to my mind, as I argued in that other thread, it is clearly the case that Idealism involves less metaphysical assumptions. But I am very aware that the materialist states the exact opposite! And here we have an example:

                              Randfan says:
                              For idealism you have to come up with additional explanations to resolve problmes that don't arise with materialism. Parsimony would dictate that what we percieve is real. So, in the end, there is no need for faith based reality.
                              Now there are problems with idealism which don't arise with materialism, but they haven't been mentioned in that thread! (at least not in the first 2 pages and I can't imagine they will be). But the problems with idealism dwarf the problems with materialism!

                              And I wonder what he means when he says that it is reasonable to suppose that what we see is real? Anyway, I certainly agree with him. Yup, the squares A and B in this checkershadow illusion really are different colours!

                              But the materialist has to maintain the squares A and B are actually the same colour (because the pixels are the same colour). So the materialist has to maintain that what we perceive is not reality; in fact the materialist has to maintain we are systematically mistaken in everything we perceive!

                              And he maintains there's no need for a faith based reality. But why is the hypothesis of a meta-consciousness a faith, but the hypothesis of a reality existing in abstraction from our perceptions not a faith?

                              I have a great deal of experience of communicating with people on the jref. Briefly looking through the thread a lot of the familiar names are still there . And I can honestly say that they've learnt absolutely nothing since I last argued with them. They are all philosophically clueless.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X