(no title)
chrispine | 3 years ago
> At an abstract computational level it’s like our intelligence.
True, but abstract computation isn't what matters about intelligence. How about this thing I just made up:
By letter count, "computations" is like "intelligence".
I mean, it's true, but the number of letters in the word is also not what matters about intelligence.
The rebuttal is almost identical to the argument it rebuts: If computational complexity was the same as intelligence, then a swirling dust cloud of sufficient size would be more intelligent than all of humanity.
Which is absurd.
saeranv|3 years ago
Defining consciousness is its own challenge, but one definition that I like (as a layperson) is that it consists of an approximate model of our self, that emerged as the brain recursively modeled itself while attempting to model other's behaviours, a critical trait once group co-operation and adversity became key to our survival.
This seems correct to me, a hurricane exhibits computational complexity, but it does not have a sense of self, and does not use that sense of self to make decisions.
Of course, that sense of self can also be broken down into manual computation, it's just a very complicated computation. For example, a bayesian interpretation of that "approximate model of our self" might define it as a generative model or joint distribution of actions and states, embedded within a markov decision process (MDP). Modeling, or speculating about your self would therefore consist of sequentially sampling from the joint distribution over several timesteps of the MDP.