logoalt Hacker News

orbital-decaytoday at 5:02 AM1 replyview on HN

It defines consciousness as an

>observer-dependent model, subject to social consensus.

Which is actually more pragmatic than most conflicting philosophical definitions involving qualia and other handwavy concepts.


Replies

D-Machinetoday at 5:13 AM

Few philosophical definitions actually involve qualia or handwaving, because serious philosophy is quite careful about noting vagueness (handwaving) and circular defintions (qualia).

Also, saying "I define consciousness as X" and then going on to show that, because I decree consciousness to be X, we don't need to worry about Y, Z, and so on, isn't pragmatic at all, unless you pick an X that everyone agrees on. The definition you give is something hardly anyone would agree on.

Social consensus probably isn't even an aspect of consciousness, but at least one can make that argument coherently, if you rephrase it as "part of the decision to call something 'conscious' or not involves social consensus". But this is also trivial and boring and not why anyone actually cares about the "is AI conscious" debate.

show 1 reply