Consciousness and Intelligence

[Riverwind (imported)]

Jema, just had another thought about your cat. Tie a string to the handle and put the other end on a spool (wood if you can) then teach him to pull on it and not jump to the flush and you may have solved the problem.

River

[Riverwind (imported)]

The question is a simple one: Is intelligence (or, if you prefer, high intelligence) possible without consciousness?

I just posed this question to my son and his answer was no. I thought I trained him better then that but his reason and mine were totally opposite and for many of the same reasons.

So there you have it, one yes, one no and it was father and son.

Your boards that you post to I am sure will have similar responses.

Fun Question, bring on more.

River

[jemagirl (imported)]

The burning question begged by Jema's post though, is whether or not Bush knows how to use the toilet AND flush it.

I don't know if he know how to use a toilet for its intended purpose but he knows how to flush a Trillion dollars down the pooper on a war we didn't need

[BossTamsin (imported)]

Of course intelligence can exist without consciousness, and vice versa. I'm surprised any of you would even need to think about this. As proof, I offer CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, YouTube, Facebook, MySpace...

While I may be (grudgingly) willing to accept that humans are conscious/sentient, I'm not as willing to accept that more than a handful are actually intelligent.

[theGelded1 (imported)]

What if they are the same thing ?

Consciousness may be but a low level of Intelligence. All lifeforms capable of moving themselves around thier surroundings must be aware of them at some level. The degree of awareness might vary, but it will be there. With this awareness comes the abilaty to manipulate the things around the concious mind. At the start it might seem like instinct, but as the abitlity to manipulate the surrounding environment grows it can be mistaken for a sign Intelligence.

[erikboy (imported)]

Interesting question.

But I am almost sure that consciosness is required for intelligence.

Intelligence you see in computers that use adaptive algorithms or learning algorithms is mere reflection of human intelligence in a concentrated form.

Computers are not aware of themselves, the just follow orders, algorithms.

Algorithms are human creation again. Even learning algorithms react always in certain computed and predictable ways.

So I consider intelligence of computers as something that seems to exist. It is the programmers and computers creators intelligence all put together that you see. And still, it is just a following of prewritten orders.

Why computers win grand masters is simply the reason that despite the huge number of combinations number of combinations are limited. And computers have the raw power to calculate all the possible combinations of game and make the best possible move. Humans behave different way.

If the being is unconcious the intelligence is artificial or that intelligence is just empty shell we see.

Computer could adapt any behavioral rule.

Source of our human Behaviour is not certain rules dictated by someone else, but ourselves. Our nature, our conciousness.

Our conciousness is the force that is keeping us alive, that forces us to move forward in certain direction. To seek something, to discover...

Now some say that we can program computers to behave the same way. But remember, computers just follow orders. They can not change their minds. They are always rational. They reflect programmers mind. It is like an echo of a real voice.

E.

[Blaise (imported)]

The burning question begged by Jema's post though, is whether or not Bush knows how to use the toilet AND flush it.

He doesn't care; he just dumps on the rest of us.

[Blaise (imported)]

Interesting question.

But I am almost sure that consciosness is required for intelligence.

Intelligence you see in computers that use adaptive algorithms or learning algorithms is mere reflection of human intelligence in a concentrated form.

Computers are not aware of themselves, the just follow orders, algorithms.

Algorithms are human creation again. Even learning algorithms react always in certain computed and predictable ways.

So I consider intelligence of computers as something that seems to exist. It is the programmers and computers creators intelligence all put together that you see. And still, it is just a following of prewritten orders.

Why computers win grand masters is simply the reason that despite the huge number of combinations number of combinations are limited. And computers have the raw power to calculate all the possible combinations of game and make the best possible move. Humans behave different way.

If the being is unconcious the intelligence is artificial or that intelligence is just empty shell we see.

Computer could adapt any behavioral rule.

Source of our human Behaviour is not certain rules dictated by someone else, but ourselves. Our nature, our conciousness.

Our conciousness is the force that is keeping us alive, that forces us to move forward in certain direction. To seek something, to discover...

Now some say that we can program computers to behave the same way. But remember, computers just follow orders. They can not change their minds. They are always rational. They reflect programmers mind. It is like an echo of a real voice.

E.Still, what is consciousness? It seems to be more than awareness. It seems to suppose some notion of self and recognition of that self, but what is that and what does it mean. Computers and brains are not the same; at least our brains do not work the way computers work.

[fhunter]

Interesting question.

But I am almost sure that consciosness is required for intelligence.

Intelligence you see in computers that use adaptive algorithms or learning algorithms is mere reflection of human intelligence in a concentrated form.

Computers are not aware of themselves, the just follow orders, algorithms.

Algorithms are human creation again. Even learning algorithms react always in certain computed and predictable ways.

So I consider intelligence of computers as something that seems to exist. It is the programmers and computers creators intelligence all put together that you see. And still, it is just a following of prewritten orders.

Why computers win grand masters is simply the reason that despite the huge number of combinations number of combinations are limited. And computers have the raw power to calculate all the possible combinations of game and make the best possible move. Humans behave different way.

If the being is unconcious the intelligence is artificial or that intelligence is just empty shell we see.

Computer could adapt any behavioral rule.

Source of our human Behaviour is not certain rules dictated by someone else, but ourselves. Our nature, our conciousness.

Our conciousness is the force that is keeping us alive, that forces us to move forward in certain direction. To seek something, to discover...

Now some say that we can program computers to behave the same way. But remember, computers just follow orders. They can not change their minds. They are always rational. They reflect programmers mind. It is like an echo of a real voice.

E.

So let's summ this up to the point that humans can set their own goals. And computers are still unable to do this.

And as of orders and rationality of computers - they can be programmed to look irrational.

Here comes second question - if something looks sentinent - is it really sentinent. (Think about Elisa program, or it's more modern variants).

[jemagirl (imported)]

I often hear people say animals are not intelligent, nor are they self possessed or self aware. In short they do not have a soul. I often hear this argument from scientists some of whom even make reference to a soul, and that I find very very interesting. Can any one scientifically verify the existence of the human soul? What exactly are they arguing for?

People in point of fact, ARE animals. Mammals to be more precise and primates to be even more precise. These however are but degrees of distinction between "Man" & "Beast". A long continuum from the single cell to the complexity of the Grey Whale. Oh sorry I accidentally followed the wrong branch.... Silly me. What I meant to say was ... A long continuum from the single cell to the complexity of the Elephant.... Wait nope I did it again... Ok, One more time, A long continuum from the single cell to the complexity of the Homo Sapien Sapien.... or "wise man".... We may have misnamed our species, because we are anything but wise. But I digress...

If you want to talk about consciousness and higher intelligence we can have several different kinds of conversation. First we can have the scientific conversation. Some one comes up with a theory based [ hopefully ] on some evidence. They write a paper and present it for pier review. Everything gets hashed out. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's corpse smiles knowingly. (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... r_1831.jpg)

Some how in that conversation a couple of points seem to get glossed over. First, at what point does the boundary layer between "Man" & "Beast" exist, and what makes the grass greener on our side of the fence? The second point that seems to get very little discussion is, are there other fences, and if there are, what does the grass look like over there? In other words if intelligence and consciousness can exist in any form at all, why should it be unique to us? I would think that any one making an argument that we alone poses this gift ought to at least explain that very unique set of circumstances. To do otherwise requires a great leap of faith. Just the sort of thing science tends to frown on.

Another conversation we might have would involve religion. Now not all religions teach that man is separate from nature... and above all other creatures. To the few religions that do teach that, I ask, if this gift from God is good.... why only man? In Fact how do you know that only man has this gift? Is that purely a matter of faith, or are you taking a leap of science?

My personal feeling is.... that intelligence and consciousness are experiential by nature. I can not know whether or not elephants have the same gift as I do because I can not experience being an elephant. It has been noted however that elephants are social animals that use complex forms of communication. They have tribes led by matriarchs and each elephant has a place in the hierarchical scheme of things.

Wolves also have a hierarchy in their packs. Each wolf in the hierarchy "knows its place". Each tries to move up in the hierarchy by challenging the wolf above it. It seems to me that they are not only aware wolf nature but also keenly aware of their place in their wolf clan. They seem to be self aware and self possessed.

When they hunt other animals they do not rely merely rely on greater numbers and sharper teeth, but instead make an effort to outwit their prey. If some one cares to distinguish between those qualities and some other special quality we poses as humans that is fine, but I think it is a bigger claim to say we are unique and different from the "Animals" than it is to say we are similar. We either "Evolved" from the same primordial soup, or were "Created" by the same God. Either way isn't it more likely that we would share a great deal of similarities with the animals rather than being completely separate and distinct from them?

The burden of proof either way should at least be equal.