THE PROBLEM WITH CONSCIOUS MACHINES

The previous decade has witnessed the widespread recognition that sophisticated AI is under development. The likes of Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking, André LeBlanc, Stefan Wess, Jonathan White, Daniel Dewey and other experts in this field have all agreed that it is a matter of time before super intelligent machines are created, and, although opinions differ, all predict this event will occur in the following couple of decades. However, they all end their predictions with strong cautionary notes that the rise of " superintelligent " machines might bring about great disasters as severe as the end of mankind. Even though this is a topic that sparks much interest, this paper is essentially not concerned with the scenario whether a machine revolution might wipe humans off the face of the earth, but with the formulation of an " intelligent " machine and the next step—a conscious artificial intelligence. So, what are the current positions on machine intelligence and consciousness that brought about such grave predictions? I would like to divide the current attitudes into three " schools " of thought: the computationalist/pragmatic school, spearheaded by several top AI researchers mentioned above; the functionalist/emergentist school, represented by Raymond Kurzweil; and the panpsychist/IIT school, whose proponents are Christof Koch and Giulio Tononi. It seems that all of the experts cited at the beginning of the previous paragraph (comprising the first, computationalist/pragmatic group of thinkers) focused their attention on intelligence as something that is (partially) equivalent with consciousness, disregarding qualia in general. In their opinion, the main premise of artificial intelligence (AI) coming into being is the so-called " intelligence explosion " , which would come about after scientists have devised a very sophisticated machine (be it hardware or software), far superior to anything we have today and integrated it with the greatest in AI at that time (a learning machine). This machine could efficiently form hypotheses, make plans based on them, execute these plans and observe the outcomes relative to the plans, and it would then be tasked to algorithmically investigate AI and create machines with greater computing power. This kind of " recursion " would add to the already exponential development of computing power in the machine, leading to an " intelligence explosion " (Dewey 2013), a threshold under which intelligence seems to peter out, but above which it thrives and exponentially grows. This would ultimately create a machine with would be able to outperform the human race in its totality in terms of intelligence, which would be a moment when the technological change would become so profound, it would change the fabric of human history. This moment was dubbed the " singularity " (White 2014). It is not hard to see why the premise of a goal-oriented and chain-reactive system opens a possibility for negative consequences. In an analogy with microorganisms, Dewey (2013) postulated the possibility of the systems algorithmic goals not being in line with the goals of humans, which would then initiate a process of eliminating the obstacle, turning the immensely superior computation machine against humanity. However, this is still the domain of intelligence viewed purely as computational power and algorithmic capabilities, while true consciousness is not even close to being explained. The question arises: could these

Progress in the understanding of consciousness as a purely physical emergent phenomenon means we will be able to make conscious robots in the not too distant future. We may also be able to upload our consciousness into these robots for virtual immortality.

To sum up, the research on robotics and artificial intelligence is on a wrong path when trying to develop conscious machines, similarly as the modern brain research is faced with an impossible task when trying to find special areas for consciousness in the brain. This doesn't mean denial of the importance of the brain or the nervous system when consciousness is studied, or that machines could not simulate conscious acts. However, locating consciousness in the brain or in the machine leads to questions which cannot be answered, because for consciousness to exist, we need much more than the brain or the machine alone.

In Philosophy of Science and History of Science, ICPR, 2005

2019

Strong arguments have been formulated that the computational limits of disembodied artificial intelligence (AI) will, sooner or later, be a problem that needs to be addressed. Similarly, convincing cases for how embodied forms of AI can exceed these limits makes for worthwhile research avenues. This paper discusses how embodied cognition brings with it other forms of information integration and decision-making consequences that typically involve discussions of machine cognition and similarly, machine consciousness. N. Katherine Hayles’s novel conception of nonconscious cognition in her analysis of the human cognition-consciousness connection is discussed in relation to how nonconscious cognition can be envisioned and exacerbated in embodied AI. Similarly, this paper offers a way of understanding the concept of suffering in a way that is different than the conventional sense of attributing it to either a purely physical state or a conscious state, instead of grounding at least a type...

The consciousness which opens us to a representation of a world otherwise closed on itself, is a fundamental attribute of nature, an essential operator in the genesis of living structures and the cognitive processes associated with them. Consciousness is the key to life. In its absence no life would have appeared on Earth or on any exoplanet. The 'computational theory of the mind' where the human mind would function as a computer machine is totally unfounded. A robot built only on the basis of the relationship between technical components managed by physical laws cannot be fundamentally autonomous, self-organized, like human beings are. It is only a more or less efficient automaton operating in an environment that has been specifically defined by his manufacturer who is naturally endowed with a consciousness which is formally irreducible to any physical interaction.

Given that consciousness is an essential ingredient for achieving Singularity, the notion that an Artificial General Intelligence device can exceed the intelligence of a human, namely, the question of whether a computer can achieve consciousness, is explored. Given that consciousness is being aware of one's perceptions and/or of one's thoughts, it is claimed that computers cannot experience consciousness. Given that it has no sensorium, it cannot have perceptions. In terms of being aware of its thoughts it is argued that being aware of one's thoughts is basically listening to one's own internal speech. A computer has no emotions, and hence, no desire to communicate, and without the ability, and/or desire to communicate, it has no internal voice to listen to and hence cannot be aware of its thoughts. In fact, it has no thoughts, because it has no sense of self and thinking is about preserving one's self. Emotions have a positive effect on the reasoning powers of humans, and therefore, the computer's lack of emotions is another reason for why computers could never achieve the level of intelligence that a human can, at least, at the current level of the development of computer technology.

BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience ISSN 2067-3957, 2018

Nowadays, there is a serious anxiety on the existence of dangerous intelligent systems and it is not just a science-fiction idea of evil machines like the ones in well-known Terminator movie or any other movies including intelligent robots – machines threatening the existence of humankind. So, there is a great interest in some alternative research works under the topics of Machine Ethics, Artificial Intelligence Safety and the associated research topics like Future of Artificial Intelligence and Existential Risks. The objective of this study is to provide a general discussion about the expressed research topics and try to find some answers to the question of 'Are we safe enough in the future of Artificial Intelligence?'. In detail, the discussion includes a comprehensive focus on 'dystopic' scenarios, enables interested researchers to think about some 'moral dilemmas' and finally have some ethical outputs that are considerable for developing good intelligent systems. From a general perspective, the discussion taken here is a good opportunity to improve awareness on the mentioned, remarkable research topics associated with not only Artificial Intelligence but also many other natural and social sciences taking role in the humankind.

Nowadays, there is a serious anxiety on the existence of dangerous intelligent systems and it is not just a science-fiction idea of evil machines like the ones in well-known Terminator movie or any other movies including intelligent robots – machines threatening the existence of humankind. So, there is a great interest in some alternative research works under the topics of Machine Ethics, Artificial Intelligence Safety and the associated research topics like Future of Artificial Intelligence and Existential Risks. The objective of this study is to provide a general discussion about the expressed research topics and try to find some answers to the question of 'Are we safe enough in the future of Artificial Intelligence?'. In detail, the discussion includes a comprehensive focus on 'dystopic' scenarios, enables interested researchers to think about some 'moral dilemmas' and finally have some ethical outputs that are considerable for developing good intelligent systems. From a general perspective, the discussion taken here is a good opportunity to improve awareness on the mentioned, remarkable research topics associated with not only Artificial Intelligence but also many other natural and social sciences taking role in the humankind.