Bernardo Kastrup - Can AI Become Conscious?

Summary

In this thought-provoking conversation, Bernardo delves into the debate on AI and consciousness, examining both materialism and idealism. He argues that while advanced technology might eventually replicate biological systems, AI consciousness is unlikely, particularly with current silicon-based technology. Using philosophical concepts, he explains that consciousness is deeply tied to biology, with subjective experience being inherent in living organisms but not in non-living systems like computers. Ultimately, Bernardo emphasizes the improbability of AI ever truly achieving consciousness, whether viewed through a materialist or idealist lens.

Takeaways

• 😀 The simulation of a process, like kidney function or a black hole, is not equivalent to the real thing, as simulations lack the causal powers of the actual phenomenon.
• 😀 Many people mistakenly treat simulations as real entities, especially when it comes to consciousness, which leads to confusion about AI's potential for consciousness.
• 😀 Under materialism, consciousness can theoretically be replicated by physical processes, suggesting that AI consciousness could be possible, though this would take thousands of years of technological advancement.
• 😀 The quest for AI consciousness might align with the search for artificial abiogenesis, where artificial organisms could metabolize and exhibit life-like functions, leading to potential consciousness.
• 😀 The idea of multi-instantiations—where different entities (like birds and airplanes) can share functional properties (like flying)—suggests that AI could eventually achieve consciousness if engineered correctly.
• 😀 While silicon-based computers are unlikely to have consciousness, the discussion is framed as an engineering issue, implying that with enough technological progress, it may be possible to replicate consciousness in machines.
• 😀 Despite advancements in AI, a silicon computer's potential to possess private consciousness is doubted, as it lacks the inherent biological processes that correlate with consciousness in nature.
• 😀 The conversation suggests that, while it's theoretically possible to replicate life-like functions, consciousness is fundamentally tied to biology, and AI consciousness would likely require biological substrates or similar systems.
• 😀 Under analytic idealism, consciousness is the underlying nature of reality, but not all things, like rocks or computers, possess their own private subjective experience. Consciousness is ubiquitous but not universally experienced by all things.
• 😀 The empirical argument suggests that behaviors in simple organisms, such as amoebas, indicate the presence of a private conscious experience, while non-living entities like volcanoes do not exhibit such behaviors, reinforcing the idea that consciousness is tied to life forms.

Q & A

What does Bernardo mean by the distinction between simulation and the thing simulated?

Bernardo explains that when we simulate something, such as kidney function or a black hole, the simulation is an accurate representation but lacks the actual causal powers or reality of the original. He uses this distinction to argue that AI, even if it simulates consciousness, does not have the same kind of consciousness as a biological organism.

Does Bernardo believe AI consciousness is possible under materialism?

Yes, Bernardo agrees that AI consciousness could be possible under materialism if the nature of consciousness is ultimately reducible to physical processes, like neurophysiology or biochemistry. However, he suggests that achieving this might take a very long time, potentially 50,000 or even 100,000 years in the future.

What is Bernardo's view on the relationship between AI and artificial abiogenesis?

Bernardo sees the creation of AI consciousness as similar to the quest for artificial abiogenesis—the creation of life from non-life. He argues that if an artificial organism can metabolize and exhibit biological characteristics, it would be indistinguishable from a naturally occurring organism, with consciousness emerging from that process.

Why does Bernardo believe silicon computers will never have private consciousness?

Bernardo believes that silicon computers, despite being capable of simulating processes, will never have private consciousness because silicon does not function in the same way as biological systems. Consciousness, according to him, is tightly linked to biological processes and the nature of life.

What is the significance of the discussion about creating AI with water pipes and pressure valves?

The discussion highlights that in principle, it is possible to create a functioning computer system using entirely different materials, such as water and pressure valves. However, Bernardo points out that just because something functions like a computer doesn't mean it would become conscious. The analogy is used to emphasize that engineering alone doesn’t necessarily equate to consciousness.

How does Bernardo differentiate between the materialist and idealist perspectives on consciousness?

Under materialism, consciousness is seen as a product of physical processes in the brain, and AI could potentially achieve consciousness through technological advancements. Under idealism, consciousness is a unified field of subjectivity, and objects, including AI, do not possess private consciousness unless they are part of a conscious being.

What does Bernardo mean when he refers to a 'unified field of subjectivity' in the context of idealism?

In idealism, Bernardo suggests that everything exists within a unified field of subjectivity, meaning that all things are part of consciousness. However, this does not imply that all things, like rocks or computers, are conscious. They exist in this field of subjectivity but do not have private consciousness of their own.

Why does Bernardo use the example of an amoeba to argue that all life has a private conscious point of view?

Bernardo uses the amoeba example to demonstrate that simple life forms exhibit behavior suggesting they have a private conscious point of view. Amoebas, for example, build protective shells, which is a behavior indicative of a conscious entity making decisions. He argues that this is evidence of consciousness even in basic organisms.

What role does empirical evidence play in Bernardo's views on consciousness?

Empirical evidence plays a central role in Bernardo’s views, as he is driven by observable behaviors in nature. He points to the behavior of life forms like amoebas and paramecium as evidence of consciousness in simple organisms, while denying that inanimate objects like volcanoes exhibit such behaviors.

How does Bernardo feel about the plausibility of creating AI consciousness in the near future?

Bernardo is skeptical about the possibility of creating AI consciousness in the near future. He believes that while AI consciousness could be theoretically possible under materialism, current technology is nowhere near capable of achieving this, and it would likely take many thousands of years of technological progress.