The following are four extreme and concise viewpoints of the relation between the mind and computers as well as consciousness and the facsimile possibilities of technology:
"A. All thinking is computation: in particular, feelings of conscious awareness are evoked merely by the carrying out of appropriate computations
B. Awareness is a feature of the brain’s physical action; and whereas any physical action can be simulated computationally, computational simulation cannot by itself evoke awareness.
C. Appropriate physical action of the brain evokes awareness, but this physical action cannot even be properly simulated computationally.
D. Awareness cannot be explained by physical, computational, or any other scientific terms (Penrose 12)."
A. implies that we are theoretically capable of understanding all of the computation occurring within our brains. With that knowledge we could probably in time build machines "which carry out the appropriate functions" that would "think" and be "consciously aware," as we define those terms.
[I would also like to point out that it is possible that machines already are conscious. There is a theory that consciousness arises spontaneously when there is a certain concentration of intelligence. If we think of the universe as a computer, then we humans are at least one of the highest concentrations of intelligence and are also conscious. It is conceivable then that, for example, the Intel Pentium II chips in computers have a consciousness of their own. It is also possible that this consciousness is different than most humans define it.]
B. implies that we could eventually understand consciousness but could not duplicate it through strictly mathematical and scientific means.
C. implies that we cannot simulate consciousness through machines, regardless of what is involved (a force within or beyond the current scope of science).
D. implies that awareness works like the "black box" model and might as well be left alone or appreciated for what it is. This is often characterized by belief in a soul which is responsible for thought and emotion.
>>>A percentage of scientist-philosophers believe that we are capable of building computers which are superior, or at least as capable as humans, at thinking and processing information>>>
A percentage of scientist-philosophers believe that we are capable of having a lucid understanding of the brain and its relation to "mind," yet will never be able to duplicate it artificially.>>>
A percentage of scientists, many philosophers, and the probably the majority of the general public tend to believe that we will never be able to quantitatively understand "thinking," "consciousness," and the concept of "mind" in human beings.>>>
Pure neuroscientists strive to spend more time doing scientific research to support views on the consciousness question than they do discussing philosophy.>>>
Penrose, Neurobiology, Quantum Coherence
plutonic) (charonic