There was recently an interesting discussion of this idea at a meeting of an organization with which I am affiliated.

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

Of course, you immediately run into some difficulties with this, including the problem of defining consciousness and the intricacies of defining intelligence.

Obviously, someone who is intelligent can be unconscious, and still be an intelligent being, but, for us humans, functional intelligence is only detectable when someone is conscious.

Most people in the discussion took the view that some type of consciousness is necessary for intelligence. But it was pointed out that some of those who design intelligence tests, acknowledge that a computer could theoretically get high scores on their tests, if its processer were fast enough and it had enough memory. It was also noted that computers have been able to defeat chess grand masters.

If consciousness is necessary for intelligence, that conceivably could reduce the likelihood of intelligent extraterrestrial life, since organisms would first have to develop consciousness, and then intelligence.

One interesting observation was that all the major religions, except perhaps Taoism, include the idea of a conscious deity or deities.

I am posting this on a number of message boards to see what different perspectives people have on this question.

This is only a comment on the general theme. There is a guy at Az S U, Paul Davies, that writes some really interesting stuff to me. The one I am reading now is Cosmic Jackpot. I think what he is building to is that some of the physics is so very, very unlikely that it is almost like the universe was made specifically for existence. Then you can argue that it was built for intelligent observers, etc. I have not gotten thru it yet, but I love it when people think up questions and then go thru the thought process to come up with answers. He mixes science and philosophy in a way that even idiots like I can undersand. I am close enough to the end that I think the conclusion will be that it would be very, very unlikely if the universe was NOT made for intelligent and observing life which leads sideways to your point about consciousness (ie the universe was not made for intelligent, nonconscious life). Hope I don't get dinged for being off topic!

And, I happened to check you profile. You spend some of the time in the SW. Me too. If you'd care to get together sometime, contact me thru my profile

Beau Geste (imported) wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2008 2:30 pm If consciousness is necessary for intelligence, that conceivably could reduce the likelihood of intelligent extraterrestrial life, since organisms would first have to develop consciousness, and then intelligence.

One interesting observation was that all the major religions, except perhaps Taoism, include the idea of a conscious deity or deities.

I am posting this on a number of message boards to see what different perspectives

people have on this question.

To be able to discuss this problem we need to define terms. So, what is precise definition of intelligence and consciousnes, as people tend to give different meanings to them.

And how to judge presence of consciousnes in some object/subject (other than the one who is judging).

PS. Can consciousnes and intelligence develop side by side?

Interesting question.

Beau Geste (imported) wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2008 2:30 pm The question is a simple one: Is intelligence (or, if you prefer, high intelligence) possible without consciousness?

Consciousness can be any life form it does not need Intelligence to survive.

If this is true then you don't need intelligence if your consciousness.

Higher life forms can have intelligence without being consiousness like that its a dog. A dog is intelligence but he does not see himself as a dog, if you put him in front of a mirror, he will most likely just look away, he will not realize that he is looking at himself. The dog is smart, he will sit up for a treat, but he has no idea that he is a dog.

So at this point I would say yes.

Now if that consciousness is self aware, it stands that it would also have intelligence.

A computer is not self aware it is just bits and bites. 0 and 1, on and off. the computer can answer your question but a human had to program it to do so. So the computer is out, pull the plug and he knows nothing and would not care that you did it. A computer has neither Consciousness or Intelligence.

There for my conclusion would be that yes you can have intelligence without consciousness. It would be those animals that can learn yet have not evolved enough to realize what they are. This is a very small group a 12 or so. Less then the Apes, Whales and humans. The list could include a few more. This would not be a big list.

River

There is a great debate on these matters. Some commentators think that consciousness is not real. Donald Dennett has written on this topic and in favor of the notion that it is not real. John Searle argues against him. They both write well.

This is a good idea for a thread. I am not really able to think through the issues these days. I lost too much after cardiac bypass surgery a few years aog. Thus, I won't try to write a summary. I have lost contact with the debate in recent years, but it is a major theme in several disciplines. I think you guys might really enjoy this one.

Interesting question.

Beau Geste (imported) wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2008 2:30 pm The question is a simple one: Is intelligence (or, if you prefer, hi

Riverwind (imported) wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:29 pm gh intelligence) possible without consciousness?

Consciousness can be any life form it does not need Intelligence to survive.

If this is true then you don't need intelligence if your consciousness.

Higher life forms can have intelligence without being consiousness like that its a dog. A dog is intelligence but he does not see himself as a dog, if you put him in front of a mirror, he will most likely just look away, he will not realize that he is looking at himself. The dog is smart, he will sit up for a treat, but he has no idea that he is a dog.

So at this point I would say yes.

Now if that consciousness is self aware, it stands that it would also have intelligence.

A computer is not self aware it is just bits and bites. 0 and 1, on and off. the computer can answer your question but a human had to program it to do so. So the computer is out, pull the plug and he knows nothing and would not care that you did it. A computer has neither Consciousness or Intelligence.

There for my conclusion would be that yes you can have intelligence without consciousness. It would be those animals that can learn yet have not evolved enough to realize what they are. This is a very small group a 12 or so. Less then the Apes, Whales and humans. The list coul

d include a few more. This would not be a big list.

River

River,

I don't know if a dog knows that it is a dog, but a wolf definitely knows it is a wolf. The wolf also knows its place in the hierarchy of the pack. Much of what people know today they learned from their ancestors, and much of what their ancestors knew they learned from the wolves. I am biassed of course being a wolf and all

Now my Cat, Mr. Livingston definitely does not know he is a cat. He is pretty sure he is a person just like any one else in the family. I can't say he is wrong. All I know is that he is absolutely self aware. They say the eye are the window to the soul and I believe it because when Mr. Livingston gets up in my face there is definitely something going on in his mind. He is also intelligent enough to use the toilet but not considerate enough to flush it when he is done.

Now George W. Bush.... he is conscious and self aware, but probably not too intelligent, and definitely not worthy of his place in the pack. He's lucky being human in that he gets to leave his post intact, because in a wolf society.... it could be go a lot differently.

I obviously have a lot more respect for Mr. Livingston and all of the wolves than I do for Mr. Bush

Jema

River,

jemagirl (imported) wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:08 pm I don't know if a dog knows that it is a dog, but a wolf definitely knows it is a wolf. The wolf also knows its place in the hierarchy of the pack. Much of what people know today they learned from their ancestors, and much of what their ancestors knew they learned from the wolves. I am biassed of course being a wolf and all

Now my Cat, Mr. Livingston definitely does not know he is a cat. He is pretty sure he is a person just like any one else in the family. I can't say he is wrong. All I know is that he is absolutely self aware. They say the eye are the window to the soul and I believe it because when Mr. Livingston gets up in my face there is definitely something going on in his mind. He is also intelligent enough to use the toilet but not considerate enough to flush it when he is done.

Now George W. Bush.... he is conscious and self aware, but probably not too intelligent, and definitely not worthy of his place in the pack. He's lucky being human in that he gets to leave his post intact, because in a wolf society.... it could be go a lot differently.

I obviously have a lot more respect for Mr. Livingston and all of the wolves than I do for Mr. Bush

Jema

I totally agree with you on cats. I think I have mentioned Rupert once or twice. He is self aware, he knows he hates all dogs including the one that just moved in with us. I had never seen him in a normal stance and have both front paws come off the floor turn to the center and let out a hissss that was telling that dog, one more step and your face will be shushi.

Dogs, are easy, Cats will tell you that they want food in there bowl and they want it now and I understand that.

My point with dogs was this they do things dogs do because there dogs, that is different then Intelligence.

River

A poetic take on the question….

Fatality

The tree is happy because it is scarcely sentient;

the hard rock is happier still, it feels nothing:

there is no pain as great as being alive,

no burden heavier than that of conscious life.

To be, and to know nothing, and to lack a way,

and the dread of having been, and future terrors...

And the sure terror of being dead tomorrow,

and to suffer all through life and through the darkness,

and through what we do not know and hardly suspect...

And the flesh that temps us with bunches of cool grapes,

and the tomb that awaits us with its funeral sprays,

and not to know where we go,

nor whence we came!...

–––Rubén Dario

FROM: Selected Poems of Ruben Dario, translated by Lysander Kemp (University of Texas Press, 1965)

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