By sensing, I mean just that, reading input. You mean reasoning/decision, I guess.
That would come from learned data, experience, imo. A child who's never touched a red hot electric stove, for example, would not have any bias towards it. No fear, no love, unless they previously interacted with one.
They would try and get close, watch it, smell it, touch it, to learn more.
The most interesting part of consciousness is how does one decide based on incomplete information? If you need to learn more, where do you find the raw information? It seems to be done subconsciously, some people have a higher affinity for learning/fact-finding than others. But all people are pre-wired to learn from others, distributed computing works best heh.
I guess you're asking the same question as me, where is this "programming" and how is it created? It's not just raw experience, it seems to be genetic/evolutionary. A sort of basic firmware to bootstrap further learning.
I find it fascinating, it would seem the brain never stops processing the data it acquires. During the day, and during the night, it always runs learning jobs.
I agree with your thinking on learning, so I have nothing to add, but it doesn't sound like we were referring to the same thing. I'll try rephrasing, though I find this subject extremely hard to communicate effectively.
When you're looking at a red sheet of paper, reading the input in the form of a signal is not the only thing happening. The signal is definitely read and passed along to other brain circuitry for processing, but somehow another thing happens: the experience of red (which is what the other poster called "feeling"). This experience of red is fundamentally different from the experience of green or blue or from the complete absence of looking. This experience is what I was referring to.
This experience seems to happen without any prior knowledge or exposure to the color red. The first time you stumble upon red light, this experience of red arises. You can tell red from green by the marked difference in experiences, but you cannot explain this difference in words to someone who hasn't experienced red or green themselves.
How does this experience get created? Does any sensor (such as a camera) have such experiences? Why not?
I don’t know if you’re asking rhetorically or not, but the honest answer is we don’t know yet. Those sensory experiences are called “qualia” in philosophy and cognitive science and they are not well understood yet. You might enjoy the paper “What is it like to be a bat?” https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/iatl/study/ugmodules/hum...
Yes, it was rhetorical in an attempt to get the point across. I try to refrain from naming qualia when first explaining it. I've read Nagel's paper, but I haven't thought about it for some time so thanks for reminding me.
I usually see the Turing Test as a thought experiment for showing the irrelevance of qualia for AI, among other philosophical objections (e.g. Chinese Room).
That would come from learned data, experience, imo. A child who's never touched a red hot electric stove, for example, would not have any bias towards it. No fear, no love, unless they previously interacted with one. They would try and get close, watch it, smell it, touch it, to learn more.
The most interesting part of consciousness is how does one decide based on incomplete information? If you need to learn more, where do you find the raw information? It seems to be done subconsciously, some people have a higher affinity for learning/fact-finding than others. But all people are pre-wired to learn from others, distributed computing works best heh.
I guess you're asking the same question as me, where is this "programming" and how is it created? It's not just raw experience, it seems to be genetic/evolutionary. A sort of basic firmware to bootstrap further learning.
I find it fascinating, it would seem the brain never stops processing the data it acquires. During the day, and during the night, it always runs learning jobs.