XTY1
It is important to understand that there is no need for a robot to
make decisions based on inner feelings, or perceptions of pleasure or
pain. A logic circuit linked to scanners, no matter the hierarchical
complexity of "if-then's," can be designed to scan an animate or
inanimate object and respond to the data by approaching, freezing,
withdrawing or "fighting" (acting to try to neutralize the object)
with no corollary requirements of pleasure, pain, desire, fear,
fighting rage or any such conscious or semiconscious qualia.
There seems to be no method of designing a logic circuit from which
consciousness emerges -- since no logic control system needs to be
aware of its inner feelings.
One can easily imagine a robot that is programed to scan for and seek
a recharge source,
XTY2
to fight barriers put up against it, including other robots (or
humans) vying for access. And to withdraw when risk of critical damage
is too high.
No consciousness needed.
++++++++++++++
On sexuality and consciousness.
Even tho binary sexuality comes with high complexity, the previous
argument against a need for consciousness applies.
If we take physics to require a largely deterministic modeling of
nature, then the physical model rests on an if-then structure
(physicists know that that model isn't quite right because of quantum
indeterminacy; biologists in general seem to wave off the
indeterminacy issue). We see from the DNA model of reproduction that
the whole sexual process with a logic circuit model. Yes, the model is
fabulously complex, but nevertheless if we are sticking with the laws
of physics as we know them, a logic circuit model lies at the core.
Now it may be that DNA is in (yet another) Goldilocks zone in which
DNA is perpetually vectored toward replicating its own form (more or
less) and has generated giant phenotypes in order to increase odds of
"immortality." Yet, even if that line of reasoning is acceptable, from
a "logic circuit perspective," that would have nothing to do with the
conscious and semiconscious maneuvers toward sexual union.
There is no bona fide physical link between the physical-biological
theory and conscious sexual strivings. That doesn't mean there is no
link. It means that current physics cannot, in principle, supply the
link.
If a human can be modeled by a logic circuit, then there is no need
for human consciousness. Well it seems that humans need consciousness.
But do they, from a physical standpoint? Let us say that you are a
conscious reader. Yet an android could read this paper and assimilate
it with no need of consciousness. In fact an android could simulate
all human behavior and mannerisms -- including such activities as
wooing others -- without being conscious, tho you could well interact
with it as if it is conscious, as do many people when interacting with
chatbots.
[See matter on philosophical zombies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I am not interested in whether philosophical zombies (the behavioral
kind) are possible. My point is that when only the known laws of
physics are the basis of our model, we end up with a philosophical
zombie. Consciousness simply does not emerge from a logic circuit, no
matter how sophisticated.
