Will Computers Ever Truly Develop Consciousness, Emotions, or Awareness?

Mussa Shehai –  Discussion 3 –  Artificial Intelligence

This idea of computer consciousness and awareness has been a common theme in many science fiction movies. But is there any science behind this idea or is it purely fiction? Do computers think and is their "intelligence" approaching that of humans?

I would argue computers cannot think as humans and will not develop consciousness, emotions or awareness because they are programmed machines designed to function within narrow parameters of logical computation devoid from emotional intelligence, intentions (meaning), free will, cognitive dissonance and the understanding the nuance of human language.

Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor (on his blog, March 31, 2011) raises vital questions “What do we mean by “think”? We mean mental act. What are characteristics of mental act? Several plausible characteristics have been proposed – free will, restricted access (only the thinker experiences his thoughts), incorrigibility (only the thinker knows with certainty the content of his thought), qualia (raw sensory experience). Etc. But philosophers agree that one unambiguous characteristic is essential to mental acts: intentionality.” He elaborates, “Do computers have intentionality? Computers certainly have secondary intentionality imparted to them by programmers and users. But to have a mind a computer would have to have primary intentionality. How would we know if a computer had primary intentionality? A computer's output would be intentional (in a primary sense) if the output were other-referential in a way that was not part of the program.”

IBM’s Vice President & Chief Technology Officer who was involved in IBM WATSON project, agrees that computers cannot think because, “Language is the expression of ideas. It is the medium by which we communicate and understanding of things between people. It is how we convey fear, hope, history, and directions for the future. Some say that it is what we use to think, speculate, and imagine. It is at the base of our cognition, our ability to understand the world around us, or at least at the base of our ability to manipulate and exchange that understanding. And it is incredibly imprecise. Our language is full of innuendos, idiosyncrasies, idioms, and ambiguity. We have noses that run, and feet that smell. …. And yet, it can be amazingly accurate. We convey so much meaning, and accomplish so much collaboration even in the midst of all the difficulties with language. Somehow, we can see through the gaps, the inconsistencies and contradictions, the irregularity, and the lack of clarity and still understand each other with a great deal of accuracy” (High. 2012, p.2). He adds computers, “That is, they perform well within narrow parameters of their intended design, but they do not perform well when those parameters change.” (High. 2012, p.3).

A human, to accurately answer a question, you must first consider the available context and frame of reference for the question, without enough evidential information, it is difficult to accurately respond to a question, even though you can precisely answer elements in the question literally, other emotional and environmental factors have to be considered. As the case with Watson, when it inaccurately answered the last question in final Jeopardy category of US cities as Toronto was perfect example of lack of language nuance.

As Goleman (1995) puts it, in every real sense we have two minds, one that thinks and one that feels. These two fundamentally different ways of knowing interact to construct our mental life. One rational mind is the mode of comprehension, but alongside the emotional mind that is impulsive and sometimes illogical.

A computer that is bounded by an algorithm cannot think, cannot have consciousness or be self-aware as it intrinsically lacks free will, emotional intelligence, reference to other external environment and understanding complex human language.

 

References

 Egnor, M. (2011) Evolution News and Views. Can a Computer Think?

Retrieved from October 4, 2016

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/03/failing_the_turing_test045141.html

High, R. (2012) IBM Redbooks, The Era of Cognitive Systems: An Inside Look at IBM Watson and How it Works Retrieved from October 4, 2016

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/redp4955.html?Open

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Progeny by Design an Immoral Act - Mussa Shehai