Talk:Artificial consciousness/Archive 12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Good work

This article is looking impressively well balanced. Good work! Loxley 13:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tkorrovi's edit

As I understand it, Tkorrovi's edit tends to emphasise a rigorous approach of the matter, which I think is interesting. Of course, it not incompatible with historical perspectives (by the way, these could be expanded a little bit, it's a miserable now :P) but I think that they are a valuable contribution. When I read "is consciousness possessed by man-made devices", I go "yeah but what is counsciousness ?"; reading something which addresses the difficulties of defining cousciousness, I find it both richer and closer to what I have seen of the state of the art in the field (Zeleznikar). Rama 14:24, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's the first sentence in an encyclopedia article. It's for people who have never heard the term artificial consciousness before in their lives and want to know what it is. If you don't know what consciousness is, there's a wikilink right there to click to see the article Consciousness. We needn't attempt a rigorous philosophical definition in the first sentence. -- Schaefer 17:46, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes of course, but on the other hand, Artificial counsciousness is a scientific subject, so it is not irrevelant to state what is problematic -- in this case, the very definition of "counsciousness". Also, the link to the article Consciousness is half-misleading: anyone "knows" what counsciousness is, yet no practical definition has been produced; that is, "counsciousness" here has a very precise and particular meaning, which is yet to be determined.

I also point the first sentance of Consciousness: "Consciousness is a quality of the mind generally regarded to comprise qualities such as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment.": here we have several ill-defined word ("subjectivity", "self-awareness", "sentience", "sapience", "percieve"), which in turn point to other articles which all rely on similary vague words, or constitute circular definitions. Tkorrovi's sentence does not attempt to provide a definition, it just says that the current hot issue is to provide one; I think that this a healthy way to begin, since it states the current situation on the topic, and does not suggest that such a precise, rigourous and applicable definition already exists. Rama 18:07, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Test Timurghlu 15:16, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)