Well, I assume that AGI, while self-aware, will not be "conscious" (i.e. feel pain).

The issue is how much organic life combined with simulated consciousness will it take to lead to pain emotions. The presence of a brain and nervous system is probably of significance.

Also, as such simulated forms of consciousness would not have gone through experiences they would not have gone through the developmental processes of narrative self identity. This would mean lack of reflective consciousness which is necessary for free will.

It does depend whether pain and emotion is central to self-awareness. That is unless such simulations are able to develop as independent forms and evolve as such, like the 'gods' which were imagined in myths.

Intelligence =/= consciousness (& self-awareness =/= pain-awareness), so why do you assume consciousness – simulated or not – will be required for or is entailed by 'AGI'?

It partly comes down to the question of what is consciousness? It also depends on what do the artificial simulations serve, and in accordance with whose will? If one has any sympathy with panpsychism, there is a consciousness which may have rudimentary developments.

Human consciousness may be where it involves self awareness and reflective ability. If the artificial are mere intelligent bots with no consciousness they are hollow automations dependent on programming. This would be degeneration rather than evolution potentially, the opposite of beings with free will.

It partly comes down to the question of what is [do we mean by] consciousness? — Jack Cummins

Maybe for you ... a stipulative definition suffices, however, for a subject matter-informed, speculative discussion: consciousness = pain-awareness (i.e. what bodily activity-feedback feels like, not just PNS reflexes).

It also depends on what do the artificial simulations serve, and in accordance with whose will?

AGI =/= "artificial simulations" (whatever those are). As for "programming": same as neonatal pair-bonding + socialization in humans but with powerful neural nets instead: training metacognitive systems to self-learn within enabling-constraints. IMO, 'intelligence' = outside-the-box thinking that surpasses – repurposes – "programming" (i.e. not just "bot automatons").

If one has any sympathy with panpsychism ...

I don't – it's only a reductionist appeal to ignorance (i.e. woo-of-the-gaps) and/or compositional fallacy.
 

... beings with free will.

E.g. such as ...

One of the issues central to the debate about free will is the way in which thoughts and behaviour are determined by nature and nurture. This poses the problem that humans have lack of capability to change, at the level of thoughts and neurochemistry. My own view is that human beings have reflective consciousness, which is the foundation of potential change. — Jack Cummins

I just had an experience that makes me question just how much free will we have. I went to Hawaii with my sister and two other women. We stayed in her timeshare. Some problems came up and the stress took a toll on my sister, reverting her back to a three-year-old in a daycare center having to fight for a toy. Her reactions to me were insane but not unexpected. before leaving, I told all my friends I didn't want to go because I was afraid this would happen. The point is I am sure this is not what my sister would want to happen if she truly had freedom of will. Obviously, she did not have freedom of will but was thrown back in the past and lost all self-control in relation to me but oddly could snap back to appropriate behavior when speaking with others.

The most helpful information I have gotten is dog breeders do not put puppies with the same mother in the same home because since birth they competed with each other. The life story my sister created for herself, was running her, not her better judgment and in her mind, I was competing with her and inconsiderate of her feelings. This is pretty common in sister and brother relationships and it goes against any chance of having a good outcome because the person is not wholly in the here and now but has a childhood perspective of what is so.

Going by your definitions of consciousness and intelligence, the idea of truly free thinking AGI is probably a long way off at present. It would come down to beings capable of insight, as the eureka moments of creativity. This is rare in humans, especially as humans make very flawed choices.

Some of this comes down to the aspects of lower self, or ego as opposed to altruism. However, with AGI there is the question of the development of balance based on sensation, intuition, rationality and emotions. Rationality alone without the other aspects may lead to the absence of empathy and compassion, necessary for altruistic consideration.

Of course, it may be possible to programme AGI with the categorical imperative for consideration of the needs of others, but applied without discernment it may lead become too utilitarian. The existence of an inner world may be necessary for a sense of duty inherent in free moral choices.

What you are saying about your experience with your sister shows the power of nurture inherent in our core thinking. As Freud suggested, so much of our basic personality structure is determined in our first 5 years. This is also consistent with the neurochemistry of thought, with the added factor of nature, including genetics, alongside nurture.

It is so difficult to break free from our constructions and defence mechanisms of the past. I don't have brothers or sisters, but I am aware that I am restricted by aspects of childhood patterns of thinking. In particular, I am inclined to go into the victim mode as a doorway into negative thinking.

Cognitive behavioral therapy is more focused on the present as opposed to the analysis of the past in psychoanalytic therapy. Making changes is very far from easy though, as it may require a need to reframe the past. It may require a lot of work on oneself to do this effectively and consistently. In this sense, free will may not be a given aspect of thinking but as a mode of ability which needs to be developed.

Obviously, she did not have freedom of will but was thrown back in the past and lost all self-control in relation to me but oddly could snap back to appropriate behavior when speaking with others. — Athena

It is so difficult to break free from our constructions and defence mechanisms of the past. — Jack Cummins

@Jack Cummins - Yes. The past and present are intertwined and affect our behaviour. Defence mechanisms can be helpful or otherwise. Our predictions or expectations in close relationships are susceptible to memories and events replayed in our minds. Attitudes towards others can be ingrained and become part of who we are, our personality and sense of morality.

We all make judgements, rightly or wrongly. The issue of free will is important when it comes to crimes of passion. Just how much responsibility or accountability a person has.

It can come down to self-mastery and control of emotions. Some people's 'bad' behaviour can be triggered by others who are apparently 'rational' with a 'higher' degree of self-knowledge. Rationality is privileged by those who stand in judgement. Who is more likely to be heard/listened to and understood in a system dominated by males?

There is still a prevalent attitude where females are deemed more irrational and emotional then males.
The police are still 'learning lessons' when it comes to processing domestic/sexual abuse/rape.

There is nothing 'odd' about people behaving better towards 'distanced' others than ones closer in their lives, minds and memories. This can be seen in how carers of elderly parents can be disbelieved by health professionals. The mask is switched from personal angry attacks by the 'demented' to charming and congenial smiles to those in higher authority. Nothing to see here. Move on...

So, there is still some degree of free will left. Even if instinctual. Some control.
However, degree of responsibility is another thing... not easy to assess...
When it comes to our stories, it's not always possible to see the perspective from the 'other side'.

This is where careful and considered questioning comes into play. To examine assumptions and presumptions and so forth...

truly free thinking — Jack Cummins

Please explain what you mean by this phrase. Also why are you anthropomorphizing prospective AGI's metacognition (i.e. why assume that 'nonbiological thinking' is to think like humans)?

What you are saying about your experience with your sister shows the power of nurture inherent in our core thinking. As Freud suggested, so much of our basic personality structure is determined in our first 5 years. This is also consistent with the neurochemistry of thought, with the added factor of nature, including genetics, alongside nurture.

It is so difficult to break free from our constructions and defence mechanisms of the past. I don't have brothers or sisters, but I am aware that I am restricted by aspects of childhood patterns of thinking. In particular, I am inclined to go into the victim mode as a doorway into negative thinking.

Cognitive behavioral therapy is more focused on the present as opposed to the analysis of the past in psychoanalytic therapy. Making changes is very far from easy though, as it may require a need to reframe the past. It may require a lot of work on oneself to do this effectively and consistently. In this sense, free will may not be a given aspect of thinking but as a mode of ability which needs to be developed. — Jack Cummins

You triggered some thoughts in my head.

Number one thought is how important is the first 5 years. I think that information is stored in our subconscious and pops up automatically when something in the present triggers it. As for the recent drama with my sister, I would swear that was a frightened 3-year-old child with no developed self-defense skills other than screaming and attacking, and no language to explain the situation and the choices in that situation.

Number 2 is linguistics therapy, that explores those hidden thoughts and emotions and rewrites them. Many years ago stress triggered my PTS and instead of being one person having different experiences, I became several people fighting for control and one was a murder. Not a fun experience. My therapist regressed me to the traumatized one-year-old and helped me rewrite the story created by the infant. Amazingly that snapped me back together and I was once again one person having different experiences. I am a firm believer in the power of linguistics therapy and rewriting our personal life stories.

Number three is Eastern philosophy. From this Eastern perspective, we intentionally learn virtues and intentionally practice and practice them until they become habits. That might be the key to freedom that you are looking for. If we do not use a spot in our brain, the cells will atrophy. The cells we do use grow. Imagine the intentional adult in control and freedom from the past.

I work on both rewriting the past and focusing on virtues. But I have the luxury of security that a younger person is not apt to have. It is insane to leave a person with intense insecurity and expect good results. It is a little crazy to feel safe when in fact one is not safe. :rofl: Much of my life was an exercise of insanity. Trying to make myself believe things were better than they were and functioning without the social support we need. Man, it is not easy being human. But we can use Virtue cards, and use them when we are not sure of what to do and in so doing make living with virtues a habit.

PS

Amity — Amity

post is a good one. When I came of age, women were expected to marry, have children, and stay home to be homemakers. I strongly value that and believe it is essential to civilization, but it is not 100% good. There were problems with that.

I think a good compromise would be returning to college, getting a degree, and then having a career. Individually we can not make a perfect world, but I believe together we can manifest a better reality.

Interesting to hear your perspective. Take care :sparkle:

There is so much 'assumption' involved in the concept of free will, which may be one of the reasons why many have sought to think outside of the idea. The phenomena of human judgmentalness can be a stumbling block in how behaviour and choices are made. It comes down to ideas of judges, and biases, including racism and sexism.

It may be a grey and debatable area, because moral responsibility may be relinquished under determinism or seen too rigidly in ideas of free will. This may mean that all aspects of specific choices need to be looked at clearly. This would suggest the need for individuals to be able to analyse or think about the factors involved in choice and even examine them in understanding the psychological and philosophical aspects of choice.

Language and linguistics is important in the navigation of choices. This may be where human beings differ so greatly from animals. Lqnguage is at the core of human meaning and understanding. As the cognitive behavioral thinkers suggest, emotions and behaviour are not caused by experiences but by our interpretation of them. Nevertheless, it is a difficult area because while humans may struggle with interpretation and framing, the experiences of perceived 'trauma' has lasting effects, including upon the brain and biochemistry, This includes PTSD and the basis of so much which is experienced and diagnosed as 'mental illness'.

I am aware of your previous references to the idea of 'free thinking.' I do see it as thinking independently of socialised and conventional forms of thinking. I would go a stage further and see it as being about standing back from one's own thoughts as far as possible in critical thinking.

The whole issue of anthromorphising ideas of AGI is also an important area for philosophy. Today, I came across a book which explores this. . It is, 'The Book of Minds: Understanding Ourselves and Other Beings, from Animals to Aliens', Philip Ball (2022). He looks at the nature of anthromorphism about human 'minds', as well as questioning ideas of 'intelligence'. I have been reading it this evening and hope to add a further entry tomorrow, especially as there is a chapter on the nature of choice.

'The Book of Minds: Understanding Ourselves and Other Beings, from Animals to Aliens', Philip Ball (2022). — Jack Cummins

With all due respect, I suspect a less superficial (non-technical) gloss on the topic of 'nonhuman intelligence' is popularist Yuval Noah Harari's Homo Deus (2016). YMMV.

As far as I'm concerned, Jack, anthropomorphizing intelligence / mind (as you and others do) shows a basic lack of knowledge of cognitive sciences in general, artificial intelligence in particular and related concepts covered by the philosophy of mind. Your subjectivist / folk psychological qualifiers such as "intuition" "truly free will" "consciousness" "inner world" "emotion" "insight" "empathy and compassion" "truly free thinking" etc have nothing substantive to say about nonhuman – nonbiological – metacognition such as prospective AGI (or 'strong AI' ... rather than mere chatbots/LLMs & expert systems).

And you still haven't addressed, Jack, (1) why you assume 'self-aware intelligence requires consciousness (i.e. any phenomenology whatsoever)' or (2) why compatibilism (re: embodied volition – whether in biological or nonbiological systems) does not suffice to address the concerns of your OP.

I am not sure why you seem to be opposed to Philip Ball straight away. He is an award-winning writer on science and culture, who studied chemistry at Oxford University and physics at the University of Bristol, so his credentials seem fine. When writers use technical language too much it seems to me that it is to mystify more than explain.

The gist of Ball's argument is that there is a great diversity of 'minds' ranging from animals, humans and artificial 'minds'. He argues that there is a tendency towards mindedness in the path of evolution and this involves 'agency'. He does not rule out the creation of 'mind' artificially points to the role of meaning and purpose in this process within systems. One point which he makes, which I think is extremely important is that it is highly likely that organisations will have a shaping role in the forms of technology created. This is a very basic summary of his ideas.

In thinking about Ball's writing and the nature of artificial intelligence, my own position is that such forms are unlikely to be merely neutral but bound up with ideological values. In particular, as with transhumanism, there are political aspects, especially the interests of the wealthy and powerful elite. Freedom and will as concepts does not involve equality of interests necessarily Just as the philosophy of Christendom protected the powerful, the philosophy of AGI is connected with ideological interests within science and, those who fund research and projects

Language and linguistics is important in the navigation of choices. This may be where human beings differ so greatly from animals. Lqnguage is at the core of human meaning and understanding. As the cognitive behavioral thinkers suggest, emotions and behaviour are not caused by experiences but by our interpretation of them. Nevertheless, it is a difficult area because while humans may struggle with interpretation and framing, the experiences of perceived 'trauma' has lasting effects, including upon the brain and biochemistry, This includes PTSD and the basis of so much which is experienced and diagnosed as 'mental illness'. — Jack Cummins

Amity — Amity

I wish I had remembers the words '"emotions and behaviour are not caused by experiences but by our interpretation of them." when I was in the heat of an emotional storm with my sister. I was so aware of that, but could not put the right words to that awareness at the time. :rofl: It can be hard to be rational when the bombs are falling. But I did know my sister was in her little girl story and ideas of competition.

The chemical component of past trouble concerns me. That does not seem fair to me. A bad experience is bad enough, but to live with it our whole lives just isn't fair.

WOW! I just looked for more information and especially this jumps out at me as very important!

The third medicine is community care. The truth is, we heal together. Oppression and colonization teach competition, close-mindedness, distrust, individualism, and the goal of obtaining power over others. Rewrite that script. Recite the love language of your ancestors.

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2023/06/healing-collective-trauma

I so wish I could get my brain to write books. One would be "Our Shared Trauma" and it would about how the Great Depression and Second World War traumatized us. Us being worldwide but my thoughts are limited to knowledge of the US experience. There are some good books about what war does to human beings, and always periods of war and famine have scarred human beings. The way we talk about this today gives us some hope for a more civilized future.

The chemical component of past trouble concerns me. That does not seem fair to me. A bad experience is bad enough, but to live with it our whole lives just isn't fair. — Athena

And relevant to the thread title, what does an inability to live life free from the effects of such scars say about free will?

I have worked with many people who have experienced PTSD, including those who have suffered serious effects from war situations in various parts of the world. So many aspects of trauma affect people, including childhood sexual abuse. Such trauma can be seen as extremely damaging and there is also a crossover between people diagnosed with PTSD and personality disorders.

Of course, it would be an error to see such damage as being damaging beyond repair necessarily. But, it may take a lot of therapy and support for healing to occur. This is especially true when those who have a history of early childhood trauma experience severe life stresses at later points in life as well.

So how is the "ideological influences" on the development of prospective AGI different – worse – than those affecting human childhood-adolescent development? You (Mr Ball) seems to believe without warrant that AGI will be incapable of learning how to think outside of ideological boxes the way (some) humans do.

Again, reread and address the rest of my post ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/932449

The nature of childhood trauma and development of AGI are different. That is because while traumas do have a damaging effect, such traumas impair quality of life mainly. The creation of AGI is more about the development of a different kind of being entirely.

I have looked back at your previous linked post and it seems that you value 'intelligence' in an extremely abstract way. I am certainly not of the opinion that human thinking is always supreme. However, what the danger of AGI involves is the attempt to surpass the human in the darkest sense of Nietzche's idea of going 'Beyond Good and Evil'.

The danger of trying to create intelligence which is different from the human is that it is 'cold' and brutal and may be the death of ethics itself. The idea of artificial intelligence and machines is becoming an ideal, as being greater than the human values. It involves a shift in seeing intelligence as primary as opposed to consciousness as being. Itis a way of legitimising brutality and mass destruction, which is happening in so many parts of the world . It is the opposite of the idea of wisdom in thinking and choice.

The path of creating AGI is the radical alternative to the idea of the development and value human consciousness itself. It signifies the idea replacing human beings with the non-human. Do you not see this as being problematic at all?

The nature of childhood trauma and development of AGI are different. — Jack Cummins

:roll: Strawman. I never claimed or implied anything about "childhood trauma".

It signifies the idea replacing human beings with the non-human.

Only to conspiracy paranoids who are terrified of a robo-apocalypse (e.g. The Terminator). Nonsense non sequitur.

Do you not see this as being problematic at all?

I don't have this "problem", Jack :sweat:

It is not about whether you or I have a 'problem' with certain ideas. It is about the future of humanity. As for apocalyptic scenarios, we have already had the Second World War and Hitler in the twentieth first century. In the world presently, there is so much conflict and war, such as the Ukrainian situation and the Middle East. It is not simply science fiction scenarios.

Of course, this involves the dark side of human nature itself. So, what I am querying is for whose benefit is AGI? Surely, what we need is more wisdom which is about development of human values as opposed to the illusionary glamour of AGI. The pursuit of philosophy for human thinking is more important than the artificial in choices.

So, what I am querying is for whose benefit is AGI? — Jack Cummins

AGI's "benefit" in the long run. To paraphrase Freddy Zarathustra: Man is rope stretched between animal and AGI ... :smirk:

Surely, what we need is more wisdom...

Nothing I've speculated on above is incompatible with your/my need for wisdom.

Nietzsche was not in the position to judge the benefits or disadvantages of AGI. He was an existential philosopher/poet offering a critique of the consequences of Christianity. He was also not able to see how his ideas would be used by the Nazis. I am not opposed to the idea of AGI but have questions about ethics, and the 'free will' which AGI would offer. This is for humanity and all forms of life.

At the present time, we are in the position to think about 'wisdom'? With the current developments information is replacing 'wisdom'. I would say that freedom of thought involves being able to think about the future consequences of thought. Would AGI ever be able to develop wisdom?

The idea of free will was a doctrine in the past which came loaded with ideas of sin, the fall of mankind etc. However, what the notion of free will, even seen in the paradox of compatabilism, does maintain the idea of moral responsibility.

Apparently, you don't recognize the relevance of my paraphrase of Nietzsche. :meh:

I imagine that AGI will not primarily benefit humans, and will eventually surpass us in every cognitive way. Any benefits to us, I also imagine (best case scenario), will be fortuitous by-products of AGI's hyper-productivity in all (formerly human) technical, scientific, economic and organizational endeavors. 'Civilization' metacognitively automated by AGI so that options for further developing human culture (e.g. arts, recreation, win-win social relations) will be optimized – but will most of us / our descendants take advantage of such an optimal space for cultural expression or just continue amusing ourselves to death? :chin:

Thus, as I've already pointed out, the human "need for wisdom" (e.g. ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics) will remain to be cultivated by us reflectively and dialectically (like other modes of hygiene & fitness) so long as the human condition (i.e. facticity) remains.– the advent itself of AGI will not change that. And compatibilism (re: embodied metacognitive volition, ergo moral agency) suffices, so I don't see it's conceptualization as either paradoxical or problematic (i.e. like the MBP, "free will vs determinism" is a pseudo-problem).

Of course, it would be an error to see such damage as being damaging beyond repair necessarily. But, it may take a lot of therapy and support for healing to occur. This is especially true when those who have a history of early childhood trauma experience severe life stresses at later points in life as well. — Jack Cummins

It is crazy making when something triggers emotions that bring past feelings into the present and the person experiencing this is not aware of the problem being in the past. The person may know the present reactions are inappropriate for the present but have no control over the feelings. Awareness of the traumatizing event is essential to regaining sanity.

Because preverbal children have no verbal explanation of what happened, they can't be aware of it without someone explaining what happened. Fortunately, my mother told me of discovering I had one leg shorter than the other and I had trouble walking. That is why I was put in a body cast and the doctor was pretty careless with me when he dropped me on the table like a suitcase and told my mother she could take me home. But I didn't understand the chaotic terror I felt until I did EST and regressed to that moment in time.

I would say preverbal babies record such moments emotionally and don't have words to explain what happened. I might be stuck with that time in my history if my mother had not told me, and I had not found the explanation of PSTD and had not read a book about traumatized children. I was diagnosed as having PSTD but the event that caused it was unknown. When I told professionals what happened to me they ignored the possibility that the medical procedure could have been traumatic. I had been molested when in my teens and the therapists were hung up on that. When I asked why that would cause a problem I was told the child's body could not cope with such a terrible thing. Huh?. The molestation led to a family problem but in itself was not so terrible compared to being encased in cement for a year. :lol: I am angry about people being unaware of how badly medical procedures can affect a child. Hopefully today, doctors recognize there is a sentient being in the body they are treating and the primary caregiver may need extra support to feel confident in their ability to care for the child.

I think what we know now can result in a better world. Human beings have been very barbaric, Wars are very barbaric and it is shocking to me that some nations today are still acting like chimpanzees in the wild. We have nations acting like preverbal animals and thinking their barbaric behavior is justified. For every baby in the world, I am saying that barbaric behavior can never be justified. War is a crime against children.

The issue is how much organic life combined with simulated consciousness will it take to lead to pain emotions. The presence of a brain and nervous system is probably of significance. — Jack Cummins

Pain requires an organic body that can be aware of pain. This is true for any pain or feelings of joy. Without the body, feelings can not exist and without feelings, judgment is lacking an important piece of information.

The experiences before language has been grasped are probably not processed fully. That may be what is so problematic about childhood traumas. This applies to desires and will as well. Language is so central to understanding, choices of thinking and choices in behaviour. The development of ability to articulate experiences and choices is so variable in adults too.

Kahneman's ideas on 'Fast and Slow Thinking' are relevant here. The experience of are useful here. In particular, his differentiation between the experiencing self and the narrative self is useful. Even though he says that the two constructs are interrelated, the two modes are related to how life is experienced in the moment and seen in retrospect. The framing of past experiences can be seen as important in the construction of future choices, especially as the ongoing development of will.