If you have not read the previous blog then I suggest you do so you understand the context of this after thought. In the previous blog I concluded that in order for an artificial machine to be conscious its physical hardware had to develop with its software; just as our neural networks physical developments and changes directly (intrinsically) cause our phenomenal consciousness (whatever that might be) to change aswell. I argued that if a machine did not do this then it would not have conscious experience like us; although it might have some very abstract form of consciousness.
However I thought of the case of cochlear implants, which allow the user to have normal functioning hearing; hearing being one such part of conscious experience. Now I don’t really know how the software or hardware of these implants work, but I assume they are fairly stable and static in their design, and not dynamic like biological neural networks. Therefore perhaps my software-hardware unified development theory needs reconsidering. If any reader knows about this I’d be interested to hear from them.
However reconsidering once again, it may well be that at such an early stage of processing the unity of software and hardware development is unnecessary because the biological cochlear doesn’t change much once it has developed, i.e. it has quite a static function.
There are other cases of combining artificial and biological parts in the brain, such as rats that can be remote controls by having electrodes implanted in their neurons. Clearly biological and non-biological mechanisms can be combined to facilitate significant and interesting functions. However at least on the level of rats we don’t know if they have phenomenal consciousness like us due to their lack of reportability. If we were to start replacing many of a persons neural networks with computer chips simulating such a function but through a different physical medium, they might start to lose their usual phenomenal consciousness, or even develop a different one. (A good outline of this thought experiment can be found here http://www.consciousentities.com/stories.htm#chip-head) One can only speculate on such an issue, but perhaps future research will shed light.
What do readers think?
2 comments:
Hello again: just a quick thought on this post - have you considered the possible effects of deep brain stimulation (for Parkinsons treatment for instance) on p-consciousness, as another example in the same vein as your cochlear implant one? I think there may perhaps also be a dissociation of a sort between the development of consciousness and the maintenance of consciousness: somehow and at some point, babies become conscious beings from unconscious beings - once this occurs, is it possible perhaps that this 'consciousness' constitutes a 'stable state' which perturbations (such as a cochlear implant) do not effect too much? Just a quick thought, I've not detailed it...
The thought experiment you refer to considers the scenario where biological neurons are replaced one-by-one with artificial neurons of equivalent functionality. The questions that arise are many, including: is the person whose neurons are replaced stay that person (in terms of personality, memories, etc...)? In terms of consciousness, does the person remain conscious, and if not, is there a gradual 'decrease in consciousness' or is there some 'cut-off' point? And others which I can't remember at the moment.
Finally, in response to your comment at my blog: I find that submitting to blog carnivals increases people who visit your blog, as does leaving comments on blogs with similar subject matters as your own. And thank you for the link, no doubt you found that blogger makes it very easy using the 'edit layout' function from the dashboard.
I'm not sure I wouls agree there is a point at which a baby becomes conscious. Consciousness is a spectrum for me and it is also a very general word that can be applied to various form of consciousness, such as visual (and the other 4 sense), emotional, and self. Self-consciousness might be the only form which I can swing your way. Presumably there comes a point when a baby or more likely young infant has thoughts on the fact that they are somthing which thinks: self-consciousness.
On that thought experiment:
the first issue regards the self which I intend to blog on later.
The second point in relation to the above, I certainly don't think there would be a cut off point, but a gradual decrease (if there is one at all.)
Finally thanks for your advice!
Post a Comment