An opinion piece on the conscious machine fallacy
The Myth of the Conscious Machine
Science and tech pundits say it’s only a matter of time I say not ever
“Humans will become very intimate with machines in the future”— Adi Da
Popular science culture suggests it’s almost a given that at some point artificial intelligence will be conscious and embedded in some mechanical, virtual or synthetic structure that is non-organic and not created via biology. This possibility is based on an erroneous understanding of what consciousness is — there is a caveat which will be looked at later in the article.
The Simulation and Appearance of Consciousness are Never Being Conscious:
This should be quite obvious but it gets swept aside as if it’s irrelevant. A machine or computer or its software may mimic what it is to be conscious to the absolute degree, showing logical response on every level including emotion and not be conscious. Even autonomous choice and super-intelligence do not indicate consciousness.
There is great excitement and positivity around all this as if it is both inevitable and salvatory and even a religious quality to it in some areas as if the techno-future will reveal a true utopia and :
“venerates neither gods nor man — it worships data.” ¹
It’s the misunderstanding of what consciousness is, that creates a follow through error. Consciousness is subjectivity, the sense of being.
Subjectivity is not, nor can it ever be an object or objective state. In practical terms, it does not exist. The living consciousness is a projection. It’s like a visual film projected onto a wall and erroneously taken to be a solid object, or like trying to locate a person seen in a dream in the waking state (in present space-time). Another analogy is throwing black paint into the air and wondering why it does not color or stick to the “air”.
Consciousness or subjectivity never occupies space or inhabits space, that is the illusion promoted and acted on. There is no thing of being.
For instance, when neuroscientists investigate the brain, looking for the roots of consciousness, they appear to be looking for the causative actuality of subjectivity, as if the “projection on the wall” was an objective fact, a something they were seeking to actually find in the brain. It’s as if they are looking for a rainbow in brain circuitry.
No one needs to be a scientist to investigate consciousness, subjectivity is everyone’s birthright and everyone’s most intimate knowledge. Philosophers and poets perhaps, but not scientists, they are too heavy-handed, generally — in search of an object where there is by its nature, only a subject.
The search for consciousness in matter is truly the original “fool’s errand” there is no such “thing”. Time for philosophy to inform science.
When consciousness is seen to already pervade matter and spontaneously associate with biological forms and manifest as different degrees of conscious life, this is perhaps the most accurate description.
The idea that matter, in programmatic circumstance generates consciousness, and consciousness as a subject can be “created” is getting it ass-about.
We can clone thousands of vegetative specimens (for instance)and in each case, we can presume an extremely primitive subjectivity, but we did not create the subjectivity or consciousness, it was already there, in a sense, because it already pervaded matter, we gave it the circumstances to be revealed or “brought to life”. Knowing these circumstances is the science.
Based on this same erroneous reasoning it would seem logical that since we apparently, constantly create conscious life forms by design and perfect replication, we could do so in a mechanical, or virtual form.
There is no doubt, mechanical devices and virtual forms can (or will be able to) simulate and mimic the perfect appearance of consciousness and subjectivity, but they will never actually have subjectivity or be “subjects” because the projected image is again being mistaken for the subject, except potentially in the case of Cyborgs, which already begin with a conscious entity.
The Caveat: Cyborgs
When synthetic components increase and bio-software augmentation of humans develop as they will following current trends, the line between the two may have a seemingly gray area. It may be possible to extend consciousness by the blending of the synthetic with biological, this is already happening with for instance a conjoined artificial arm linked to the nervous system and under biological volition.
Biology comes first not the other way around. There will never be a time when consciousness is produced outside of biology. Consciousness can be extended via an artificial device but it may not be created or replicated or uploaded into a completely synthetic or virtual container. So there is no problem with consciousness and the cyborg, nor does this suggest that because synthetics are used, a completely artificial container of consciousness is possible.
Related →
