Artificial Intelligence & Sentience

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
[N.B. This is the forum that was called ‘Exploring Buddhism’. The new name simply describes it better.]
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Artificial Intelligence & Sentience

Post by undefineable » Sun May 12, 2013 1:44 am

shel wrote:Yeah, philosophical materialism is probably not very practical for use in day to day activities. For the impractical uses, philosophical materialism is the dogma. Isn't that obvious?
Words are an irritation to thought, and technical terms are the worst - I just discovered that 'dogma' simply means 'belief', whereas I'd been under the impression (from somewhere or other) that it meant 'belief unsupported by all the relevant available evidence'. Philosophical materialism easily can be and has been (here atleast) shown to be such a belief.

By 'the dogma', do you mean the dogma most helpful to understanding philosophical questions? The main problem with AI theory seems to be the use of the 'data' concept to cover phenomena (intuitions and so on) of which it forms only a 'nucleus', the rest having presumably been written off as 'subjective' (and thereby nonexistent?!). Materialism doesn't seem to have much bearing on the subject, unless you go 'hardcore' - and deny the conscious awareness with which you then go on to deny all conscious awareness _
shel wrote:
Your suggestion that physical reality may be unknowable to us at some fundamental level is comparable to the theological concept of Divine Ineffability..
I guess, in the sense that an ant doesn't have the capacity to understand a man, as a man understands.
So might physical reality be fully transparent (i.e. viewable *objectively*) to no conceivable mind at all? {Note - Many of us will be aware that the omniscience of the Buddhas is first and foremost an understanding of Mind and minds, since all primates(!) need to devote a level of brainpower to these and all related issues that only those involved in science and technology need devote to the physical world.}
shel wrote:Perhaps you don't understand the moral aspects of objectification.
Well 'objectifying beings as physical energy manifesting as well-organised matter' is one thing, but refusing to acknowledge the subjective point of view of something that appears to be another sentient being -because of one's own subjective nuances and/or intellectual assumptions- is another. The AI described earlier in the thread doesn't sound like it has enough biological 'fluidity' in its would-be-mental processes to be sentient, but who knows? _ _

Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Artificial Intelligence & Sentience

Post by undefineable » Sun May 12, 2013 2:00 am

Kim O'Hara wrote:Is this a sentient creature or a robot?
Maybe - if the cells organised themselves in a way somehow conducive to sentience :shrug:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests