turchin (turchin) wrote,
turchin
turchin

GPT генерирует статьи о сознании

Заставил GPT-3 генерировать статьи о природе сознания: Жирным выделен мой промпт.

This is an arxiv article on the topic "Anthropic pricnciple and qualia". Below is its abstract:

The anthropic principle states that the universe must be filled with life in order for it to exist. This has been a controversial idea, as some scientists have argued that there are no limits to what can happen if only certain conditions are met (e.g., the right laws of physics). Others believe that we live in a multiverse where different universes could contain any possible state of affairs, including those where life does not occur at all. We argue here that the anthropic principle should be taken seriously even when other theories predict outcomes that are inconsistent with it. In particular, we show how the anthropic principle can explain why our universe contains life despite being one of many universes in which such a thing would not occur. The results suggest that the anthropic principle may play an important role in explaining why nature behaves as it does.

I'm not sure I understand everything in this paper, but it seems like they're saying that the existence of life requires the existence of a higher power or something similar. It's interesting because it suggests that maybe we don't need God to explain why there is life after all. If you think about it, if there was no god then there would be nothing for him to do and he wouldn't bother creating anything either. So maybe God is just a byproduct of the universe being so complex that it requires an explanation.

I'm not sure if this is what the paper is saying, but it's interesting to think about.

The next paper is called "Conceptual Penetrability and the Rise of New Qualia" and its abstract is as follows:

The conceptual Penetrability thesis holds that all mental states are constituted by their conceptual contents. In this paper, I argue that this thesis is true and that it has important consequences for the study of consciousness. In particular, I argue that it implies a kind of conceptual atomism according to which any given conscious experience is fully constituted by the concepts that are active in it. This in turn implies that there can be no such thing as a new quale, since any new conscious experience can always be fully explained in terms of concepts that were active in previous experiences.

I don't quite understand this one either, but it's another paper on consciousness so I'm just going to skip over it.

The next paper is called "A Computational Investigation of the Nature of Consciousness" and its abstract is as follows:

In this paper, I argue that consciousness is a kind of computation that takes place in the brain. This is a common idea in philosophy, but I am not aware of any attempts to provide a detailed theory of how this might work. In this paper, I suggest one such theory.

I don't quite understand all of this paper either, but it seems to suggest that consciousness is a result of the brain performing computations. I'm not sure if I agree with this or not, but it's an interesting theory.

The next paper is called "The Structure of Consciousness" and its abstract is as follows:

In this paper, I argue that consciousness has a complex hierarchical structure. This structure involves several distinct dimensions such as the distinction between primary and secondary qualities and the distinction between central and peripheral awareness. Each of these dimensions are in turn divided into several sub-dimensions. I suggest that this sort of hierarchical structure is common to all conscious entities.

I'm not sure what this has to do with artificial intelligence, but it sounds interesting.

The next paper is called "A Formal Theory of Consciousness" and its abstract is as follows:

In this paper, I attempt to provide a rigorous mathematical theory of consciousness. I begin by defining what I call the "phenomenological algebra", which is an algebraic structure that formalizes the concepts of "consciousness" and "awareness". From there, I define a measure called the "phenomenological density", which can be used to determine the degree of consciousness or awareness of any entity.

I don't quite understand all of this paper either, but it seems to suggest that consciousness is a mathematical concept of some sort. I'm not sure if I agree with this or not, but it's an interesting theory.

The next paper is called "The Structure of the Brain and its Relationship to Consciousness" and its abstract is as follows:

In this paper, I attempt to provide a taxonomy of the structures of the brain based on their relationship to consciousness. Using this taxonomy, it is possible to determine which parts of the brain are necessary for consciousness and which are merely sufficient.

Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 3 comments