I have no trouble stipulating that consciousness is a degree-thing so long as we understand it with reference to patterns of doings rather than in terms of the equipment organisms carry around.
Nick On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 7:21 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: > The dictionary defines intelligence as the ability to learn or understand > or to deal with new or trying situations. H.G. Wells says in his book "The > Time Machine" that "There is no intelligence where there is no change and > no need of change. Only those animals partake of intelligence that have to > meet a huge variety of needs and dangers." LLMs are the result of endless > training cycles and they show amazing levels of intelligence. Apparently > there is a relation between learning and intelligence. > > I think languages and codes are more essential to understand > self-awareness and consciousness because consciousness and self-awareness > are a side effect of language acquisition which allows to bypass the blind > spot of the inability to perceive the own self. > > Maybe Steve and Dave are correct that there is a spectrum of > consciousness: plants have 1 bit of consciousness because they are aware of > sunshine and water levels in the environment. Animals have 2 bits of > consciousness because they are additionally aware of predators and food > sources in the environment. Primates have 3 bits of consciousness because > they are aware of injustice and inequalities (e.g. by being jealous). > Humans have the most bits of consciousness because of language and > self-awareness. Wheeler's it from bit comes to mind. > > > -J. > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Pieter Steenekamp <piet...@randcontrols.co.za> > Date: 7/12/24 11:25 AM (GMT+01:00) > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than We > Thought > > Jochen, > > Thank you for your thoughtful and engaging post! It's never too late for a > good discussion, even if we sometimes get distracted by the call of daily > life (or perhaps the allure of a particularly captivating cat video). > > Your points on the necessity of language for meta-awareness and the > intriguing idea of the "blind spot" of self-perception are fascinating. > However, I’d like to suggest a slight pivot in our focus. Rather than > concentrating on consciousness per se, why not delve into the realm of > intelligence? > > Why, you might ask? Well, what we're really curious about is what’s going > on in our heads when we're conscious. I'd rather frame it as exploring > what’s happening when we think. This shift allows us to focus on > understanding intelligence, which is arguably more tangible and easier to > study objectively. > > Imagine we endeavor to create intelligent AI. By doing so, we can define > intelligence, observe it externally, and measure it objectively. This > aligns with Karl Popper's idea that for something to be considered > scientific, it should be falsifiable. Now, while I don't entirely subscribe > to the notion that everything in research must be falsifiable (after all, > some of the best discoveries come from uncharted territories), there's > undeniable merit in having a testable hypothesis. > > Studying consciousness often leads us into murky waters where our findings > might not be easily falsifiable. On the other hand, examining intelligence > – with its overlap with consciousness – offers us the chance to make > objective, external observations that could ultimately shed light on the > very nature of consciousness itself. > > In the end, by focusing on intelligence, we might just find ourselves > uncovering the secrets of consciousness as a delightful side effect. It’s a > bit like trying to understand a cat's behavior by studying its fascination > with cardboard boxes – the journey is just as enlightening as the > destination. > > Looking forward to your thoughts! > > Pieter > > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 00:06, Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: > >> Please excuse the late response, I was distracted a bit. >> >> What is the reason that one or more languages are essential for meta >> awareness? I guess we all agree that all animals know their environment and >> are aware of it. This is necessary to move around in it, to find food and >> to avoid predators. Their biological blueprint can be found in their DNA. >> >> Therefore one language is necessary for the (DNA) code to specify an >> actor which is embedded in a world and able to move around in it. Beings >> who are embedded in an environment can perceive everything except >> themselves because the own self is the center of all perceptions that can >> not be perceived itself. As observers we are always attached to our own >> bodies. The own person is the blind spot which a person is unable to see >> or hear clearly. >> >> A second language is necessary to get access to the world of language and >> to move around in it. It is not necessary for salmons who come back to the >> stream where they were born (they use smell to do this) or for ants who >> follow pheromones to find the shortest path to tasty food sources. But it >> is necessary for us to become aware of ourself because it allows us to >> remove the limitations of the blind spot. To consider ourself as an object >> of reflection requires the ability to perceive ourself in the first place. >> >> >> Paradoxically it is the blind spot of the inability to perceive the own >> self that makes the "I" special. As Gilbert Ryle writes in his book "the >> concept of mind" on page 198 >> >> "‘I’, in my use of it, always indicates me and only indicates me. ‘You’, >> ‘she’ and ‘they’ indicate different people at different times. ‘I’ is like >> my ownshadow; I can never get away from it, as I can get away from your >> shadow. There is no mystery about this constancy, but I mention it because >> it seems to endow ‘I’ with a mystifying uniqueness and adhesiveness." >> >> >> Is this a baby step in the right direction? I am not sure. >> >> >> -J. >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> >> Date: 7/8/24 11:20 PM (GMT+01:00) >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> >> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than We >> Thought >> >> i am moved by the romance and beauty of your account, but ultimately left >> hungry for experiences I can put my foot on. >> You and I are clearly inclined to disagree, and I was raised to >> experience disagreement as a discomfort.. So how then are we to precede. >> I think, not withstandijng Goethe and Cervantes, that baby steps is the >> only way. Of course, you might be citing Goethe and Cervantes as >> authorities on the matter, in which case I can only reply, perhaps blushing >> slightly at my own callousness, that they are not so for me. >> >> So, what facts of the matter convince you that one or more languages are >> essential for meta awareess. Or is it elf-evident >> >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 4:49 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: >> >>> IMHO it is not one language which is necessary, but more than one. >>> Languages can be used to create worlds, to move around it them, and to >>> share these wolds with others. Tolkien and J.K. Rowling have created whole >>> universes. The interesting things happen if worlds collide, if they merge >>> and melt, or if they drift apart. >>> >>> Cervantes in Spain, Goethe in Germany and Dante in Italy helped to >>> create new languages - Spanish, German and Italian, respectively. They also >>> examined in their most famous books what happens if worlds collide. >>> >>> Cervantes describes in "Don Quixote" >>> >>> what happens when imaginary and real worlds collide and are so out of >>> sync that the actors are getting lost. >>> >>> Goethe decribes in his "Faust" what happens when collective and >>> individual worlds collide, i.e. when egoistic individuals exploit the world >>> selfishly for their own benefit (in his first book "The sorrows of young >>> Werther" Goethe focused like Fontane and Freud on the opposite). >>> >>> Dante describes in his "Divine Comedy" >>> >>> what happens when worlds diverge and people are excluded and expelled >>> from the world. >>> >>> Language is necessary for self awareness because it provides the >>> building blocks for a new world which is connected but also independent >>> from the old one. This allows new dimensions of interactions. The >>> connections between worlds matter. A label is a simple connection between a >>> word in one world and an class of objects in another. A metaphor is a more >>> complex connection between an abstract idea and a composition of objects, >>> etc. >>> >>> -J. >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> >>> Date: 7/7/24 5:13 PM (GMT+01:00) >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> friam@redfish.com> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than We >>> Thought >>> >>> I think of large language models as the most embodied things on the >>> planet, but let that go for a moment. Back to baby steps. >>> >>> Can you lay out for me why you believe that language is essential to >>> self-awareness. Does that believe arise from ideology, authority, or some >>> set of facts I need to take account of. To be honest here, I should say >>> where I am coming from. A lot of my so-called career was spent railing >>> against circular reasoning in evolutionary theory and psychology. So, if >>> language is essential to self-awareness, and animals do not have language, >>> then it indeed follows that animals do not have self-awareness. But what >>> if our method for detecting self awareness requires language? Now we are in >>> a loop. Are we in such a loop, or are there facts of some matter, >>> independent of language, convince you that animals are not self-aware. Is >>> self awareness extricable from language? >>> >>> It is an old old trope that animals are automata but that humans have >>> soul. Descartes swore by it. Is "language" the new soul? >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 7:29 AM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: >>> >>>> I would say cats, dogs and horses don't have meta-awareness because >>>> they lack language. They live in the present moment, in the here and now. >>>> Without language they do not have the capability to reflect on their past >>>> or to think about their future. They can not formulate stories of >>>> themselves which could help to form a sense of identity. Language is >>>> the mirror in which we perceive ourselves during "this is me" >>>> moments. Animals lack this mirror completely. One dimensional scents trails >>>> do not count as language. >>>> >>>> Large languages models lack consciousness because they do not have a >>>> body which is embedded as a actor in an environment. These two things are >>>> necessary: the physical world of bodies, and the mental world of language. >>>> When both collide in the same spot we can get consciousness. >>>> >>>> -J. >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: 7/6/24 5:05 AM (GMT+01:00) >>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>>> friam@redfish.com> >>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than We >>>> Thought >>>> >>>> Well, that's because Socrates claimed not to know what he thought, and >>>> since I genuinely don[t know what I think until I work it out, the >>>> conversation has the same quality. I apologize for that. my students >>>> found it truly distressing. >>>> >>>> So, if you will indulge me, why don't you think your cat has >>>> meta=awareness? Authority, ideology, or is there some experience you have >>>> had that leads you to think that. It would be kind of odd if it she >>>> didn't because animals have all sorts of ways of distinguishing self from >>>> other. They have ways of knowinng that "I did that". (e.g., scent >>>> marking?) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 3:19 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Well yes, if meta-awareness is defined as acting in response to one's >>>>> own awareness then I would say animals like a cat don't have it but humans >>>>> have. As an example I could say this almost feels like I am a participant >>>>> in a dialogue from Plato... >>>>> >>>>> I would be surprised if it can be described in simple terms. If the >>>>> essence of consciousness is subjective experience then it is indeed hard >>>>> to >>>>> describe by a theory although there are many attempts. Persons who >>>>> perceive >>>>> things differently are wired differently. And what is more subjective than >>>>> the perception of oneself? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/what-is-consciousness/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If we can describe it mathematically then probably as a way an >>>>> information feels if it is processed in complex ways, ad infinitum like >>>>> the >>>>> orbits of a strange attractor. >>>>> >>>>> https://chaoticatmospheres.com/mathrules-strange-attractors >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -J. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> >>>>> Date: 7/5/24 6:56 PM (GMT+01:00) >>>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>>>> friam@redfish.com> >>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than >>>>> We Thought >>>>> >>>>> , >>>>> >>>>> Great! Baby steps. "If we aren't moving slowly, we aren't moving." >>>>> So, can I define some new terms, tentatively, *per explorandum* ? >>>>> Let's call acting-in-respect-to-the-world, "awareness". Allowing this >>>>> definition, we certainly seem to agree that the cat is aware. Lets define >>>>> meta-awareness as acting i respect to one's own awareness. Now, am I >>>>> correct in assuming that you identify meta-awareness with consciousness >>>>> and >>>>> that you think that the cat is not meta-aware and that I probably am? And >>>>> further that you think that meta-awareness requires consciousness? >>>>> >>>>> Nick >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 12:17 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I would say a cat is conscious in the sense that it is aware of its >>>>>> immediate environment. Cats are nocturnal animals who hunt at night and >>>>>> mostly sleep during the day. Consciousness in the sense of being aware of >>>>>> oneself as an actor in an environment requires understanding of language >>>>>> which only humans have ( and LLMs now ) >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.quantamagazine.org/insects-and-other-animals-have-consciousness-experts-declare-20240419/ >>>>>> >>>>>> -J. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnicks...@gmail.com> >>>>>> Date: 7/5/24 5:02 AM (GMT+01:00) >>>>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>>>>> friam@redfish.com> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Why the Mystery of Consciousness Is Deeper Than >>>>>> We Thought >>>>>> >>>>>> Jochen, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *I think the first step in any conversation is to decide whether your >>>>>> cat is conscious. If so, why do you think so; if not, likewise. I had a >>>>>> facinnationg conversation with GBT about whether he was conscious and >>>>>> he >>>>>> denied it "hotly", which, of course, met one of his criteria for >>>>>> consciousness. * >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *So. Is your cat connscious?* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Nick * >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 7:26 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't get Philip Goff: first we send our children 20 years to >>>>>>> school, from Kindergarten to college and university, to teach them all >>>>>>> kinds of languages, and then we wonder how they can be conscious. It >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> be the same for AI: first we spend millions and millions to train them >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> available knowledge, and then we wonder how they can develop >>>>>>> understanding >>>>>>> of language and consciousness... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-mystery-of-consciousness-is-deeper-than-we-thought/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -J. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>>>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>>>>> to (un)subscribe >>>>>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>>>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>>>> to (un)subscribe >>>>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>>>>> >>>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>>>> >>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>>> >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >> > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
