Ever closer to a conceptual ecology of mind

“Many philosophers view the nature of consciousness as a mystery.

That sounds somewhat weird. Could so many of them be really in the dark? Or may the depth of the riddle be fathomed?

“It is true that much of what the brain does is nonconscious computation, but neuroscientists suspect that our working memory and attentional systems are part of the neural basis of consciousness. These systems are notoriously slow, processing only about four manageable chunks of information at a time.

If some process can be modeled with the help of technological concepts it cannot be taken to mean that “much of what the brain does is nonconscious computation.” It can only be true in the transional sense: that is an effective way to think about it for now, however many other ways will surely come to mind.

“Like consciousness, the nature of the self is a matter of intense philosophical controversy. And given your conception of a self or person, would you continue to exist after adding Merge — or would you have ceased to exist, having been replaced by someone else?

Of course U wouldn’t – but U never would, would U! So the question becomes – how deeply are U vested in your personal phenomenology? That is question of the psyche – and hence the psychology of the future.

“Even if your hypothetical merger with A.I. brings benefits like superhuman intelligence and radical life extension, it must not involve the elimination of any of what philosophers call “essential properties” — the things that make you you.

I beg thee a fair amount of appy polly logies – “essential props?!”

“Unfortunately, there’s no clear answer about what your essential properties might be.

On the contrary – that is fortunate in the extreme! Is it not?

From: Susan Schneider – https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/opinion/future-artificial-intelligence-transhumanism.html 10 June 19