Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,alt.consciousness
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!fas-news.harvard.edu!newspump.wustl.edu!gumby!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!uknet!festival!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Thought Question
Message-ID: <D2nw9K.CsL@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bute.aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
References: <3f5nuu$mks@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com> <1995Jan14.043829.29350@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> <D2KrBv.ExL@spss.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 16:53:44 GMT
Lines: 37
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.alife:1855 comp.ai.philosophy:24796 comp.ai:26625

In article <D2KrBv.ExL@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
>In article <1995Jan14.043829.29350@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>,
>Greg Stevens <stevens@prodigal.psych.rochester.edu> wrote:
>>Consider a machine which
>>had no consicouness, but was programmed to behave EXACTLY as you do. No.
>>we don't have the technology, and possibly there is not enough memory 
>>capacity in the universe to do such a program without the kind of process
>>the gives rise to consciousness, but this is a thought-experiment, right?
>>
>>I think what was being asked for us to consider was this: Consider a machine
>>that was programmed to respond to stimuli the same as us, but had no
>>consciousness.  There would be no evolutionary reason for it to be
>>selected out, with us superior, if its behaviors were the same, and all
>>it was lacking was subjectivity.  Thus, it seems that there is no
>>evolutionary benefit to subjective experience per se.
>
>You're begging the question.  By assuming that "its behaviors [are] the same",
>you assume that consciousness has no behavioral consequences.  Naturally
>it will then have no evolutionary consequences either.

Suppose the behaviors are the same.  Why would that mean consciousness
has no behavioral consequences?  Sure, it would show it was possible
to get the behavior w/o consciousness; but it would not show that
consciousness was not part of the way in which humans produce the
behavior.

>By the way, evolution responds to "behavior" in a larger sense than 
>"respon[se] to stimuli".  For instance, if consciousness takes energy
>to maintain, a creature without consciousness should have an evolutionary
>advantage over one that has it, since it could divert that energy into
>more productive uses.  

Sure, if consciousness did not provide any greater advantages
(and if the other method had no disadvantages to cancel it's
advantage).

-- jd
