Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!fdn.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!news.unige.ch!usenet
From: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch (Silvere Martin-Michiellot)
Subject: Re: Thought Question
Message-ID: <1995Mar1.132156.28730@news.unige.ch>
Sender: usenet@news.unige.ch
Reply-To: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950227142108.8305A-100000@gladstone>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 13:21:56 GMT
Lines: 105


In article 100000@gladstone, Anthony Robert Philip Jeremiah <ajeremia@gladstone.uoregon.edu> writes:
>
>
>On 20 Feb 1995, Robin Faichney wrote:
>
>> Gerard Malecki (vlsi_lib@netcom.com) wrote:
>> >In article <3hu5km$t61@cato.Direct.CA> aturner@Direct.CA (Allan Turner) writes:
>> >>	But the real question is whether consciousness could be modeled by
>> >>something that was not conscious.
>> 
>> >Since humans who are presumably conscious have failed so far to come up
>> >with a model for consciousness...
>> 
>> If we don't have a model of consciousness, what do we mean when we say
>> that something is conscious?
>> ***************************************************************************
>
>
>Here is a hypothetical model to test for consciousness that I have been
>working on recently:
>
>In order for a being to be conscious it must be able to do the following 
>things:
>    
>  1) It must be able to recognize incongruencies between pieces of 
>     information
>  2) It must be able to explain what the incongruencies are 
>  3) It must be able to speculate on the consequences of the 
>     incongruencies
>  4) It must be able to speculate on a compromise for the 
>     incongruencies
>  
>Hypothetical situation using model:
>
>Suppose I held a pen up in front of your face and told you it was a  
>football. You would probably have an internal response which 
>corresponds to the  recognition of a contradiction. This is the first 
>stage of consciousness which does not reflect true consciousness, 
>because it involves no thought process. All that has occured is the
>recognition that something is wrong, but that something has not yet
>been identified. This can be likened to the blinking reflex in which
>some object moves towards your eyes but you do not know what the object
>is until after the reflex has occured.
>
>The second stage of consciousness is the ability to explain what the 
>incongruency is. In this form of consciousness, the being should be able
>to say something along the lines of - "It is not a football because the 
>object you are holding in  front of my face is linear while a football is
>spherical. So one of the contradictions you notice is in shape. What is
>especially noticeable about this stage is that you are comparing an 
>externally observable object (pen) with an internal object(football).This
>is a perfect example of how the external world and the internal world
>interact to produce consciousness.
>
>The third stage of consciousness lies in the ability to speculate on the
>consequences of incongruency. For instance, if I asked the question- what
>would be a disadvantage of using a pen as a football in a football game,
>you would respond by saying that the pen could not travel as far. Knowing
>consequences can then lead to establishing a compromise between 
>incongruencies.
>
>The final and ultimate state of consciousness then,lies in the ability
>to establish congruency between incongruent information. If I asked you
>the question, how would you make the pen operate like a football, you would
>then respond by saying that you could add extra material around the pen.
>
>
>  Implications of this model:
>
>  1) If an organism does not exhibit these 4 stages in the sequence as
>     described above, the organism is not conscious
>  2) This model implies that animals including humans can never be completely
>     conscious, rather we cycle between consciousness and unconsciousness
>  3) The only time that humans/animals are conscious, is when an event occurs
>     that triggers the first stage of consciousness (the recognition of 
>     incongruent information). Once the organism achieves the fourth stage
>     of consciousness, the organism achieves true consciousness and then 
>     returns to unconsciousness (this is where the cycling between 
>     consciousness and unconsciousness arises
> 
>                                             ANTHONY JEREMIAH


Interseting, but it doesn't work.

First, a computer would probably be able to do so.
(pro or cons, give your answer in a thread about the turing test)
Then, there are mental diseases (pathologies) than prevent from being able
to recognize, analyse, and/or respond to the kind of incongruencies you
described above. So, some humans are not conscious.

Can we prove consciousness ?
I don't know. I just know I "feel" conscious but I'm absolutely not sure that
anybody else in the world is (at least the way I am).


-----------------

"Is anyone alive down there ?"
  

Silvere MARTIN-MICHIELLOT


