Why Conspiracy Theories?

[vimothy]

Mathematical modelling has got us quite far with a lot of things but that doesn't mean it will always work. I mean, maybe it's the best tool right now. I don't really know about it. My only point is that the existence of intelligence demonstrates that it was possible for it to magically summoned up somehow from elements that didn't contain it and so there is no reason to suppose that it can't happen again.

yes but the idea here is simply that some magic can happen and we don't know why. it's like saying if we gather together a load of milk bottles at some point, at a sufficient number, they will magically transform into a sheep

 

[vimothy]

But by entertaining the notion that consciousness can have empirical underpinnings, one is motivated to investigate it scientifically. If the notion is never entertained and tossed around, arguably the scientific progress wouldn't be made.

maybe, but the reverse seems equally just as true

 

[IdleRich]

yes but the idea here is simply that some magic can happen and we don't know why. it's like saying if we gather together a load of milk bottles at some point, at a sufficient number, they will magically transform into a sheep

Not really. The point is it's not a category error.

 

[vimothy]

how so? does a sufficient level of mathematical complexity give rise to consciousness?

 

[vimothy]

there are regression functions who have gone off the map out there, like errant teens?

 

[constant escape]

maybe, but the reverse seems equally just as true

Reverse how? If one doesn't believe that consciousness is grounded in the material, then science wouldn't be the approach. Right? The approach would somehow cater to transcendence.

 

[IdleRich]

how so? does a sufficient level of mathematical complexity give rise to consciousness?

We don't know.

 

[IdleRich]

Maybe. Or non-mathematical.

 

[vimothy]

the argument, then, is that it hasn't been proved impossible to represent consciousness formally

 

[vimothy]

but the idea that we can represent consciousness in terms of a mapping between inputs and outputs seems obviously wrong

 

[IdleRich]

The argument is that intelligence/free-will whatever arose out of conditions that your claims would rule out... so what you're saying must be wrong.

 

[vimothy]

Im making claims about the power of formalisation - you're saying that life exists therefore it must be possible to create an AI

 

[IdleRich]

I'm saying that intelligence was created once from elements that intuitively don't contain the necessary qualities so it can be again.

 

[vimothy]

right

 

[vimothy]

intelligence arose, we don't know if it was created or not - but in any case, it doesn't mean that _we_ can create intelligence

 

[IdleRich]

But it does mean that you can't dismiss the building blocks in the way that you have.

 

[vimothy]

what way is that?

 

[IdleRich]

By saying "It's intuitively not the right type of thing".

 

[vimothy]

did I say that? what's not the right type of thing?

 

[IdleRich]

Yes I think you did.