Definición de conciencia Transcript: Speaker 1 Consciousness is the subjective experience of the mind and the world. It’s basically what it feels like from the first person point of view to be thinking and perceiving and judging and so on (Time 0:06:18)
conciencia definición
Recognizing the Difficulty in Acknowledging the Hard Problem of Consciousness Many scientists and philosophers struggle with acknowledging the hard problem of consciousness because some argue that it is a pseudo mystery or attempt to evade it by changing the topic. The hard problem lies in understanding the nature of experience, which is distinct from the easier problems related to functions. While some dismiss it as an initial hurdle, many recognize the significant challenge it poses in grasping the essence of consciousness, leading to varying opinions on how to approach it. Transcript: Speaker 2 Everybody what do you make of the fact that so many scientists and philosophers find this the the hardness of the hard problem and I think I should probably get you to state why it’s so Hard or why why you you have distinguished the hard from the easy problems of consciousness but what do you make of the fact that people find it difficult to concede that there’s that There’s a problem here because it’s I mean this is just a common phenomenon I mean there are people like Dan Dennett and and the church lens and other philosophers who just kind of ram Their way past the mystery here and declare that it’s a pseudo mystery and either you and I have both had the experience of witnessing people either seem to pretend that that this problem Doesn’t exist or they acknowledge it only to change the subject and then pretend that they’ve addressed it and so let’s state what the hard problem is and perhaps you can say why it’s Speaker 1 Why it’s not immediately compelling to everyone that it’s in fact hard yeah I mean just obviously a huge amount of disagreement in this area I don’t know what your sense is my sense is That most people at least got a reasonable appreciation of the fact that there’s a big problem here of course what you do after that is very different in different cases some people think Well it’s only a initial problem and we can we ought to kind of see it as an illusion and get past it but yeah just to state the problem well I find it useful to first start by distinguishing The easy problems which are problems basically about the performance of functions from the hard problem which is about experience so the easy problems are you know how is it for example We discriminate (Time 0:10:31)
The Challenge of Understanding Brain Mechanisms and Behavior Understanding how the brain controls behavior, monitors end states, and discriminates information are significant challenges in neuroscience. While the research program is clear, finding the specific neural and computational mechanisms remains difficult. Easy problems like explaining functions can be addressed using standard brain and cognitive science methods, but the hard problem lies in understanding subjective experiences that go beyond behavior and functions. Transcript: Speaker 1 And bring it together to make a judgment and control behavior how indeed do we voluntarily control behavior to respond in a controlled way to our environment how does our brain monitor To end states these are all big mysteries and actually neuroscience has not gotten all that far on some of these uh of these problems they’re um they’re all quite difficult but in those Cases we have a pretty clear sense of what the research program is and what it would take to explain them it’s basically a matter of finding some mechanism in the brain that for example Is responsible for discriminating the information and controlling the behavior and although it’s uh it’s pretty hard work finding the mechanism we’re on a path to doing that so a neural Mechanism for discriminating information a computational mechanism for the brain to monitor its own states um and and so on so for the easy problems they at least fall within the standard Methods of the brain and cognitive sciences but basically we’re trying to explain some kind of function then we just find a mechanism the hard problem what makes the hard problem of Experience hard is it doesn’t really seem to be a problem without behavior or about functions you could explain you can in principle imagine explaining all of my behavioral (Time 0:12:23)
The Hard Problem of Experience The hard problem of experience is not about behavior or functions; it is about why certain processes feel like something from the first person point of view. Explaining behavioral responses or neural mechanisms does not address the central question of subjective experience. The usual methods in brain and cognitive sciences of finding a mechanism that works do not apply to understanding why consciousness feels like an internal phenomenon, separate from mere correlation between brain processes and conscious experience. Transcript: Speaker 1 A mechanism the hard problem what makes the hard problem of experience hard is it doesn’t really seem to be a problem without behavior or about functions you could explain you can in Principle imagine explaining all of my behavioral responses to a given stimulus and how my brain discriminates and integrates and monitors itself and controls you could explain All that with say a neural mechanism and you might not have touched the central question which is why does it feel like something from the first person point of view that just doesn’t Seem to be a problem about explaining behaviors and explaining functions and as a result the usual methods that work for us so well in the brain and cognitive sciences finding a mechanism That does the job just doesn’t obviously apply here we’re going to get correlations we’re certainly got finding correlations between processes in the brain and bits of consciousness An area of the brain that might light up when you see red or when you uh when you feel pain but nothing there seems yet to be giving us an explanation why does all that processing feel like Something from the inside why does it why doesn’t it go on just in the dark as if we were giant robots um or zombies without any subjective experience (Time 0:13:29)
Distinguishing between understanding function and experience The distinction between understanding function and understanding the fact that experience exists is crucial. While functions like motor behavior or visual perception can be explained mechanistically, the subjective experience of these functions remains a mystery. No matter how much we understand the mechanisms behind vision, the experience of seeing remains enigmatic and cannot be fully explained through refining mechanisms. Transcript: Speaker 2 I feel super sensitized to the prospect of people not following the plot here because it’s it’s the first time someone is is hearing these concerns it’s it’s easy to just lose sight of What the actual subject is i just want to retrace a little bit of what you said sketching the hardness of of the hard problem so you have this the distinction between understanding function And understanding the fact that that experience exists and so you see we have functions like you know motor behavior or learning or visual perception and it’s very straightforward To think about explaining these in mechanistic terms i mean so you have something like vision we can talk about the the transduction of light energy into neurochemical events and then The mapping of the visual field onto the relevant parts of in our case the visual cortex and this is very complicated but it’s not in principle obscure the the fact that it’s it’s like Something to see however remains totally mysterious no matter how much of this mapping you do and if you imagine it from the other side if we built a robot that could do all the things we Can it seems to me that at no point in refining its mechanism would we have (Time 0:20:04)
Building Machines with Consciousness The complexity of building machines with consciousness remains a mysterious challenge, even if they pass the Turing test. The concern with AI is that we may create machines that appear conscious, blurring the ethical and philosophical boundaries of consciousness. Without understanding how consciousness arises, specifically solving the ‘hard problem’, it will be difficult to ascertain if these machines truly possess consciousness. Transcript: Speaker 2 Very complicated but it’s not in principle obscure the the fact that it’s it’s like something to see however remains totally mysterious no matter how much of this mapping you do and If you imagine it from the other side if we built a robot that could do all the things we can it seems to me that at no point in refining its mechanism would we have reason to believe that it’s Now conscious even if it passes the Turing test you see so we could and this is actually one of the things that concerns me about AI it seems that one of the likely paths we could take is that We could build machines that seem conscious and and the effect will be so convincing that we will just lose sight of the problem all of our intuitions that lead us to ascribe consciousness To other people and to certain animals will be played upon because what we will build the machines so as to do that and it will cease to seem philosophically interesting or even ethically Appropriate to wonder whether there’s something that it’s like to be one of these robots and yet it seems to me that we will we still won’t know whether these machines are actually conscious Unless we’ve understood how consciousness arises in the first place which is to say unless we’ve solved the heart problem yeah and i think we can maybe we should distinguish the question Speaker 1 Of whether (Time 0:20:57)
Consciousness in Machines and People The distinction between recognizing consciousness in machines and people lies in separating the question of consciousness from the explanation of that consciousness. While we confidently assume others are conscious, the mystery of consciousness remains, whether in machines or people. Consequently, even if machines exhibit human-like behavior and introspect about their consciousness, the mystery of consciousness persists, questioning how silicon circuits or brain processes can create consciousness, leaving an unexplainable gap in both cases. Transcript: Speaker 1 We can maybe we should distinguish the question of whether a system is conscious from how that consciousness is explained i mean even in the case of other people or they’re behaving As if they’re they’re conscious and we tend to be pretty confident that other people are conscious so we don’t really regard there as a to be a question about whether other people are Conscious still i think it’s consistent to have that attitude and still find it very mysterious this fact of consciousness and to be utterly puzzled about how we might explain it in Terms of the brain so i suspect that with machines we may well end up as you say just finding it undeniable very hard to deny that machine if there are machines hanging around with us talking In a human like way and reflecting on their consciousness those machines are saying hey i’m really puzzled by this uh this whole consciousness thing because i know i’m just a collection Of silicon circuits but it still feels like something from the inside machines are doing that i’m going to be pretty convinced that they are conscious as i am conscious but that wouldn’t Make it any less mysterious well maybe it’ll just make it all the more mysterious how on earth could this machine be conscious even though it’s collection of silicon circuits likewise How on earth could i be conscious just as a result of these processes in my brain it’s not that i see anything intrinsically worth about silicon than about brain processes here there Just seems to be this kind of mysterious gap in the explanation in both cases and of course we can worry about other people too there’s a classic philosophical problem the problem of Other minds how do you know that anybody else apart from yourself is conscious (Time 0:22:13)
The Mystery of Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence As AI advances to the point where robots can detect human emotions better than humans themselves, the questions regarding their consciousness become elusive. The analogy between the emergence of human consciousness and AI consciousness raises doubts about the conscious nature of AI. With the deep connection between the nervous system and consciousness in humans, the attribution of consciousness to AI becomes a contentious issue, suggesting that the consciousness of other beings might not be as readily proven as assumed. Transcript: Speaker 2 Better than we can and we and we have put this in some format so that it has the memetic facial displays that we find attractive and compelling we get out of the uncanny valley and and these Robots no longer seem weird to us in fact they detect our emotions better than we can detect the emotions of other people or than other people can detect ours and so all of a sudden we are Played upon by a system that is deeply unanalogous to our own nervous system and then we will just then I think it will be somewhat mysterious whether or not this is conscious because We have we have cobbled this thing together whereas in our case the reason why I don’t think it’s it’s parsimonious for me to be a solipsist and to say well maybe I’m the only one who’s conscious It’s because there’s this obviously deep analogy between how I came to be conscious and how you came to be conscious so I have to then do further work of arguing that there’s something About your nervous system or your situation in the universe that might not be a sufficient base of consciousness and yet it is clearly in my own case so to worry about other people or even Other higher animals seems a stretch at least it’s it’s unnecessary and it’s it’s only falsely claimed to be parsimonious I think it’s actually (Time 0:25:16)
The Epiphenomenon of Consciousness Consciousness is likened to the smoke rising from a train’s smoke stack in the concept of epiphenomenon. Just as the smoke is a byproduct of the train’s propulsion without actively contributing to it, consciousness may not have a functional role despite being constantly present. This perspective challenges the traditional view that consciousness is the driving force behind actions, suggesting that behaviors can be explained through physical mechanisms like neurons and computational processes, raising the question of whether consciousness truly has any inherent function. Transcript: Speaker 2 Doesn’t do anything that it’s just it is an epipanominon which is an analogy often given for this it’s like the the smoke coming out of the smoke stack of an old-fashioned locomotive You know it’s it’s always associated with the progress of this train down the tracks but it’s not actually doing anything it’s it’s it’s a mere byproduct of the actual causes that are Propelling the train and so consciousness could be like the smoke rising out of the smoke stack it’s not doing anything and yet it’s always here at a certain level of function if I recall Correctly in your first book you seem to be fairly sympathetic with epipanominalism talk about that a little bit I mean it’s not epipanominalism it’s not a view that anyone feels any Speaker 1 Initial attraction for the consciousness doesn’t do anything it’s what seems to do so much but there is this puzzle that pretty well for any bit of behavior you try to explain it looks Like there’s the potential to explain it without invoking consciousness in this subjective sense there’ll be an explanation in terms of neurons or computational mechanisms of our Various behavioral responses I mean the one place where so at least starts to at least starts to wonder maybe consciousness doesn’t have any function maybe it doesn’t do anything at All maybe for example (Time 0:27:51)
The concept of zombies in philosophy, movies, and voodoo culture In philosophy, zombies symbolize beings physically identical to humans but without consciousness, sparking questions about the nature of consciousness. These philosophical zombies differ from the zombies portrayed in movies, who lack life, and those from Haitian voodoo culture, who lack free will. The idea of a ‘zombie twin’ who is behaviorally and physically identical to a human but lacks consciousness raises deep philosophical questions about the essence of consciousness and the possibility of such beings. Transcript: Speaker 1 I mean it’d been out there for a for a while in philosophy before me not to mention out there in the in the popular culture but the zombies which play a role in philosophy are a bit different From the zombies that play a role in the movies or in Haitian voodoo culture you know the ones in the movies are all supposed to be all the different kinds of zombies are missing something The zombies in the movie are lacking somehow life there if they did but reanimated the zombies in the in the voodoo tradition are lacking some kind of free will well the zombies that play A role in philosophy are lacking consciousness and this is just a thought experiment but the conceit is that we can at least imagine a being at the very least behaviorally identical To a normal human being but without any consciousness on the inside at all just acting and walking and talking in a perfectly human like way without any consciousness the extreme version Of this thought experiment says we can at least imagine a being physically identical to a normal human being but without any subjective consciousness so I talk about my zombie twin You know a hypothetical being in the universe next door who’s physically identical to me he’s holding a conversation like this with a zombie analog of you right now I’m saying all the All the same stuff and responding but without any consciousness now no one thinks anything like this exists in our universe but the idea at least seems imaginable or conceivable there Doesn’t seem to be any contradiction in the idea and the very fact that you can kind of make sense of the idea immediately raises some questions like (Time 0:30:41)