Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ProShortKingAction t1_j32rvyt wrote

Reply to comment by turnip_burrito in I asked ChatGPT if it is sentient, and I can't really argue with its point by wtfcommittee

It's not in a discord debate with philosophy nerds, it was told to represent itself as a high school teacher which is why it makes a lot of sense for it to put forward multiple possible ideas and help the student figure it out for themselves instead of giving one definitive answer on an open ended question

17

elfballs t1_j35w15z wrote

But it doesn't say "another possibility is...", instead it clearly had an inconsistent position, or rather no position at all. It's just words.

1

PIPPIPPIPPIPPIP555 t1_j33s94d wrote

But Consciousness IS Subjective Experience and there is no Philosopher that is saying that the conciousness is not subjective Experience because that is litteraly what it is

0

ajahiljaasillalla t1_j340kpd wrote

Consciousness could be a feature of universe, like some kind of field. So the brain could stand in the same relation to consciousness as radio to radio waves.

2

Revolutionary_Soft42 t1_j35kyd8 wrote

Yeah the resonance theory of consciousness , our human meat suits are just antennas orchestrating our consciousness

1

eve_of_distraction t1_j34av6f wrote

Oh yes there are. There are plenty of catastrophically confused philosophers when it comes to this. Have you read any Dan Dennett?

2

williamfwm t1_j350zmd wrote

That's because Dan Dennett is a p-zombie. He's never experienced consciousness, so he can't fathom what it is. Same goes for a number of other eliminative materialists such as the Churchlands, Graziano, Blackmore, etc

Interestingly, Richard Dawkins the mega-reductionist-Uber-atheist is not one, and neither is Kurzweil, who believes in computationalism (functionalism); you'd be hard pressed to find it in his books, but he slipped and all but admitted that consciousness is something that transcends reductionism in a reply he wrote to Jaron Lanier's One Half A Manifesto in the early 2000s

It would help the discussion if we could steal the terminology back, because it's been zombified by Dennett (continuing what his mentor Ryle started) and his ilk. I think we ought to distinguish "Dennettian Consciousness" (where 'consciousness' is just a convenient, abstract label for the bag of tricks the brain can perform) and "Chalmerian Consciousness" (the real kind of consciousness, the reduction-transcending-ineffable, for people who believe in the Hard Problem)

4

PIPPIPPIPPIPPIP555 t1_j366ifj wrote

Dan Dennett does not deny Subjective Experience he is saying that Qualia (The subjective Experience) is NOT incorrigible, ineffable, private nor directly accessible and this does not mean that Subjective Experience does not exist it does only imply that the processes that Creates the Experience is Physical processes in the brain

1

eve_of_distraction t1_j3676h2 wrote

He said consciousness is an illusion though.

1

FusionRocketsPlease t1_j36ke9e wrote

Yup. Now it remains to know how rays qualitative characteristics arise from quantities without these characteristics. If you talk about emergency, you'll get a block.

1

Technologenesis t1_j33xi6n wrote

Lots of philosophers have differing definitions of consciousness. I ultimately agree that subjective experience is a necessary component, but there are others who want to construe consciousness in more concrete physical / functional terms.

1