Consciousness Re-Imagined

Could machines become conscious? Is it possible that, like humans, machines created by man could attain the same level of intellect, linguistics, emotionality and moral responsibility as the humans? This intriguing question has split the camp of thinkers into those who believe that computers are well on their way to attaining consciousness, and those that believe that computers, no matter how sophisticated they become. Dennett, in his piece Consciousness Imagined makes a convincing case for the possibility of artificial consciousness by pointing out flaws in Searle’s argument against artificial consciousness. In the end, Dennett states that a very complex machine might turn out to have consciousness, although we will never know. This is the main pillar upon which Dennett’s argument for consciousness rests. However, there is in fact, an even stronger, concrete argument for artificial consciousness that lies right underneath our noses. In this essay, I will argue that the concept of consciousness achieved through an extremely intricate, complex machine is possible, and more importantly, supported by man’s evolutionary history that has led, ultimately, to his consciousness.

Dennett’s Consciousness Imagined is really a response to Searle’s piece, Can Computers Think?. But what exactly is he trying to say? Searle states in his article that a computer could never attain real consciousness, as it has syntax – the processes that it carries out under certain circumstances and conditions to achieve a programmed goal – but not semantics; that is, true understanding of what it is doing. Searle uses the example of the Chinese room: a sort of conversation machine that is manipulated by Searle (who has no knowledge of the Chinese language) that can hold a conversation in Chinese. Thus, he argues, a machine might seem to an outside observer as being conscious, but really, it has no semantics, and is therefore not truly conscious. Dennett counters this by asking the reader to imagine – truly – the sophistication and complexity required of a machine to be able to achieve the level of linguistic communication needed to fool a judge; it would have to be “an extraordinarily supple, sophisticated, and multilayered system, brimming with ‘world knowledge’ and meta-knowledge and meta-meta-knowledge about its own responses, the likely response of its interlocutor, [...](Dennett, Consciousness Imagined)”, and so on and so forth. He finishes his argument by stating that when we truly – truly! – imagine a machine that complex, the possibility of artificial consciousness seems more tangible.

But what is the proof that consciousness can be created out of the unconscious, that a machine or program so complex might attain consciousness? The evidence is the human race. How? First we must establish some facts. First, I believe I will raise no objections when I state that human beings are conscious. We are capable of linguistics, emotional expression, moral responsibility, and the like; traits that we often say “make us” conscious. Secondly, we must accept, for the purposes of this paper, that human beings are what they are today because of evolution. We have come a long way since the big bang, some thirteen billion years ago, when we were but sparse organic molecules floating in the soup that was earth’s early environment. Thirdly, we must accept that most animals – that is, non-human species – are not conscious; they do not possess the traits of linguistics, moral responsibility and the like (at least most of them. Some may argue that apes, dolphins and certain “higher” mammals are in fact consciousness, but we shall ignore these exceptions for the moment). With these three premises established I can continue on to my point; that humans are the greatest evidence there has ever been for artificial consciousness arising from a complex machine.

Let us examine homo sapiens, more commonly known as man. What are we? We are simply animals that have come out on top in the contest for world domination that is known as evolution. According to modern evolutionary theorists, man (and consequently all other forms of life) arose from a mixture of various gases – methane, ammonia and hydrogen – that were present when the earth was formed. Surely, these molecules in the “primordial soup” of earth’s first days were not conscious? Of course they were not! I would have to view anyone who believes otherwise as a fool, and so I will proceed. From these substances, over millions and billions of years, life forms evolved – mollusks, crabs, then amphibians, then on to reptiles, mammals, birds, dinosaurs and so on and so forth. Now, were these animals conscious? Was Tyrannosaurus Rex a reflective dino? Was the sabre-tooth tiger a conscious kitty? The answer to these questions, we have decided, is no; they did not have linguistics, a sense of moral responsibility or the ability to express emotion like modern humans do. But when we pry our eyes away from T. Rex and instead focus on the primitive apes and baboons (from which all other species of homo are derived, we are told), we see something different. On one side, we know that humans are conscious, but we also know that humans ( and some of their ancestors) always conscious. But were our ancestors conscious? The answer is yes! Sometime during our evolutionary past, we evolved from brainless molecules to intelligent, rational, emotional beings; only at that point in our evolutionary history did the brains of ancestors became so complex, they gained consciousness: we began to make cave paintings in our dwellings; we realized how it felt to become angry, sad, sorrowful, and we learned to communicate through language, not just through primal grunts and barks.

What are humans? We are simply, like Dennett states, just “conscious sel[ves], whose bod[ies] [are] the robots and whose brains [are] the computer[s].”. And so, it can be said that, like Dennett’s machine of indescribable complexity, the possibility of consciousness is no longer simply a possibility, but a fact that is strongly supported by man himself. One day perhaps, computers (like the one imagined by Dennett) will become a reality, becoming so detailed and intricately programmed, so as to be indistinguishable from a human. And when that happens, we shall know that computers have attained consciousness.

-----

If you'd like to read the material upon which this paper is based, Google "John Searle" and "Daniel Dennett".

kamster