[FOM] The Lucas-Penrose Thesis
asyropoulos at gmail.com
Thu Oct 5 14:41:48 EDT 2006
2006/10/3, Eray Ozkural <examachine at gmail.com>:
> Agreed. Here are some ways that a computer program can be more
> conscious than a human.
> 1) It can know its programming precisely.
And how exactly a computer program can know its programming? A program
exists once some computer program enters symbols, which foillow a certain
grammer, into a computer file. As such it has no self-awareness or any other
property: it is just a sequence of symbols.
> 2) It can keep a full trace of execution and then
> change/debug its programming. Using the trace it can
> perfectly recreate previous mental states
A computer program cannot actually decide whether some other program with
some input will halt or not and you expect to have programs that will
Could you please provide me with a simple example? It would be really
to have a concete example.
> 3) It can rewrite itself from scratch if it feels like.
In other words a computer virus is more conscious than a human! Note, however,
that self-reproducing programs are completely dumb. They appear to be smart,
but this is not the case.
> 4) It can extend its mind, for instance by forming new
> perception systems that can explore another sensory modality.
Programs do not have mind. Maybe one can simulate mental states with
programs, but that's all.
> 5) Turn on/off subsystems at will, precisely manage
> computational power given to processes.
> That is, it can be self-aware at the level of its programming.
Could you please give me an example of a self-aware program?
366, 28th October Str.
GR-671 00 Xanthi, GREECE
More information about the FOM