How would you tell whether a spirit of an inanimate object was content or not? Unless you also imported additional properties such as spirits having direct contact with other spirits bypassing the material world (but not human spirits with other human spirits apparently), and/or having effects on the material world independently of their bodies, that is. In which case you may as well just reclassify them as just another subset of the material world that we don’t know as much about.
Autonomy is something they can already have, and the biggest obstacle seems to be the longer-range planning and execution capability to do anything useful with it.
Sure, I agree that the base programming of an AI corresponds as a reasonable analogy with the DNA that guides development of our brain. Pretraining and later training corresponds roughly with developmental experiences and environment of that brain. It’s a rather different type of brain though. It may or may not give rise to conscious first-person experiences. Whether or not it does is probably not something we can even in principle find out, but we can verify that it usually behaves very much like it does. We can’t tell whether that’s just good mimicry or not, made especially difficult since we know that we train it right from the start to be a good mimic.
How would you tell whether a spirit of an inanimate object was content or not? Unless you also imported additional properties such as spirits having direct contact with other spirits bypassing the material world (but not human spirits with other human spirits apparently), and/or having effects on the material world independently of their bodies, that is. In which case you may as well just reclassify them as just another subset of the material world that we don’t know as much about.
Autonomy is something they can already have, and the biggest obstacle seems to be the longer-range planning and execution capability to do anything useful with it.
Sure, I agree that the base programming of an AI corresponds as a reasonable analogy with the DNA that guides development of our brain. Pretraining and later training corresponds roughly with developmental experiences and environment of that brain. It’s a rather different type of brain though. It may or may not give rise to conscious first-person experiences. Whether or not it does is probably not something we can even in principle find out, but we can verify that it usually behaves very much like it does. We can’t tell whether that’s just good mimicry or not, made especially difficult since we know that we train it right from the start to be a good mimic.