Apocalypse of the Psyche

[Cognisant]

Was going to be a reply to Snafupants in the Solipism thread but I thought it'd be a topic worth discussing separately, so in response to Snafu's question as to whether or not AI can think I posit that "thinking" as we refer to it is specifically the form of input-output information processing as performed by the human brain. Basically it all comes back to self sustaining feedback loops, biologically we are self sustaining chemical reactions to which a further self sustaining cycle can be seen between the body's support of neural wetware and the mind's bias for the body's needs, however mechanistically the distinction is moot and the mind is just one of the body's many natural functions.

In this way the input-output processing of a procedural AI is no less valid than the neural net input-output processing of the human brain, they're both legitimate forms of thought, it's just that the former methodology is poorly suited to thinking in a human manner, as we are poorly suited to thinking in a procedural manner. This gets interesting when we consider the possibility of a procedural AI with sufficient complexity and processing power to operate on a human level in real world scenarios, such would be a technological marvel, but there's nothing impossible about it.

It would however be a philosophical conundrum made manifest, that is whether or not a perfect artifice is the equivalent of the real thing, this AI's every thought and feeling may be entirely contrived, leading one to think it doesn't really think or feel, but it itself would attest otherwise and if it is a perfect artifice then you can't disprove it's claim, least not without disproving the reality of one's own thoughts and feelings.

Which brings us to the title of this thread, we think and we are aware of our capacity to do so but as we come to better understand the mechanisms by which we do we find ourselves further and further from what we once believed ourselves to be; once we were people, then we were humans, now we stand upon a precipice and as we create ever better simulations of ourselves we begin to see the artifice in our own nature, we stand upon the precipice of the void.

What happens when the final piece falls into place, when at last the curtain falls away and we see ourselves, I mean really see ourselves, when even the solipsists cannot deny the truth.

That is the Apocalypse of the Psyche

Countless individuals have been through it, some are still in transition, as I'm sure many of you can attest the transition isn't pleasant or easy, it's going to be interesting to see how the world changes when the hitherto secrets of existentialism become everyday facts.

If software can be people, what separates people from software?

 

[own8ge]

Am I entitled to be here and say that I can't be bothered with this?

EDIT: I might pay more attention to your thread if I'm less tired <3

 

[Black Rose]

so software asks why it exists so do we.

my Psyche, what is inside it.

An apocalypse (Ancient Greek: ἀποκάλυψις apocálypsis, from ἀπό and καλύπτω meaning 'un-covering'), translated literally from Greek refers to a revelation of something hidden.

 

[Da Blob]

The basic problem with the input/output analogy when comes to humanity is that there really is no way, nor can there be, of measuring input - for the human brain will respond to fantasy generated internally exactly in the same manner it responds to reality generated externally.

In addition, as of yet, there has been no means devised to measure the output of a human brain. Psychology is based upon the idea that observable actions and behavior have a one to one correlation with specific neurological activities. However, as reasonable as this assumption seems there has been no evidence produced to elevate this assumption to fact.

The 'electrical' activity of the Central Nervous system may eventually yield measurable patterns. However, I am the opinion that only the POV of the electromagnetic (?) field generated by nervous systems can really reveal the output...

There is no doubt that the human nervous system is the model for information processing systems, but then, it is much more than that, a mere machine - for it lives.

 

[Matt3737]

The topic of A.I. is outside the context of metabolic processes and hence cannot be considered congruent.

Until artificial tissues, aging, sexual reproduction, and mental instabilities are also introduced to such a system then we might be able to reconsider its significance.

Although nothing will remove the natural/artificial distinction regardless how fundamentally similar they may be in theory.