A recent article
on AI Depot claims that the lack of a soul is a precurser to
creating self-awareness. Soul is not defined, nor is the reasoning for
why it would prevent consciousness. But the article goes on to
call what some philosphers have labeled as a soul (the unique identity
we think of as "me") a side-effect of the "pattern created by
the distributed nature of brains". So maybe we have a soul but we
should call it an "identity pattern"? Who knows? For more philosophical
fun, see
some of our previous articles on consciouness such as At one with the Universe,
Robots Are People Too,
Consciousness in Humans and
Robots, Consciousness
an Electromagnetic Field?, or Consciousness for Robots.
I think they're just saying that there's no outside sources besides
pure brain activity that affects the decision making process. So
basically they're discounting anything spiritual or mystical will
affect the self aware process. I don't know what the big deal is about
being self aware or being able to identify one's self even for a
robot. I guess at the point when a robot could identify itself in a
mirror then is smart enough to be self aware? That's not likely or
necessarily a good test, though, but it might be a litmus test
threshold. I could imagine a robot could be able to identify itself by
various means like I have a blue LED to identify myself and you have a
green LED to identify you. But perhaps the point of AI where you don't
tell the robot how to identify itself and then it can identify itself
is the point where it's self aware. I don't know why it would need
spiritual or mystical power to do that nor why they would suggest that
people have said that a robot would need that to be self aware. Seems
rediculous to bring it up to ignore that anyway unless they are saying
that people are suggesting that being self aware involves spiritual or
mystical powers???
Actually, it has been proposed at various times that there is a
crucial
mystical or spiritual element involved in consciousness. Sometimes this
is proposed as the reason that machines can never be self-aware and
other times as part of an argument that making machines self-aware could
lead
to them having a soul of sorts - depending on how one defines soul.
What I've seen more frequently than a requirement of a soul is a
requirement of a biological construct: a human brain could be self aware
but a silicon brain couldn't for one reason or another. For example, our
previous story, Consciousness an
Electromagnetic Field?, proposed that consciousness required a
bioelectric field of the type generated by the electrical activity of
biological neurons, something that no current computer hardware can
replicate.
One of the fundamental problems in any discussion like this is that most
of the terms go undefined; not just soul but
consciousness, self aware, etc. Even most physchology
texts don't agree on what consciousness is or whether it exists at all,
much less if we can create machines with it...