Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,comp.robotics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!festival!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Minsky's new article (was: Roger Penro
Message-ID: <CzqIHw.27F@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bute-alter.aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
References: <39eaqk$nn9@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> <CzDqLI.686@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <3afrsd$l7m@asia.lm.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 19:08:20 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:22527 comp.ai:25439 comp.robotics:15611

In article <3afrsd$l7m@asia.lm.com> mentat@telerama.lm.com (Godshatter) writes:
>Jeff Dalton (jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk) wrote:
>> In article <39eaqk$nn9@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> hpm@cs.cmu.edu writes:
>> >
>> >These seem silly in hindsight.  AI critics of 1994 will seem equally
>> >silly.  A future Matthews (while spleening on some future proposal)
>> >will note how critics of AI were just not paying attention in school,
>> >when it was obvious in 1994 that machines could think.
>
>> How will you ever show that they're conscious?
>
>> Sure, it may seem obvious that they are conscious; but what seems
>> obvious might still be wrong.
>
>> This is very different from space flight, where there are
>> straightforward empirical tests.
>
>     Are there any impirical tests to show that you are conscious?  

There might be.

>Perhaps it is obvious that you are, but it still might not be the case.  
>If there is such a test and the AI passes, we must conclude it is 
>conscious.  In the absence of such a test, there may be no way to prove 
>the AI to be conscious any more than you can prove you are.

I don't know about *prove*.  That may be asking too much.

>     Anyhow, what does it matter?  If you can't prove the AI has - or 
>that you have - consciousness, it is a moot point.  If you can prove that 
>either one does or doesn't, does that mean that one is superior or more 
>divine or more worthy of survival than the other?  Would proving that an 
>AI can be conscious somehow lift it into the realm of self-important 
>humans or give them civil rights as equals? [...]

Well, what *would* justify giving robots civil rights?  Letting
them vote?  I find this interesting, though it's always pushed
aside by the usual flame wars.

-- jd
