- #176
radagast
- 484
- 1
Originally posted by Rader
Posted by Radagast --------
giving it high magnitutde properties, such as consciousness and self-awareness. Given we do know of physical mechanisms that are responsible for much of the current universe, and given no evidence(other than unknowns presented in the universes complexity - i.e. which is only interpreted as evidence by those wishing it to be evidence), then a non-aware physical mechanism is always a simpler, cleaner explanation, compared to created by an self-aware entity. Hence my invocation of Occam.
--------
Self awareness is a gifted property, unique of humans, that for now, we can only test in humans. In can be argued though, that physical mechanisms are self aware, but not the way humans are. Is not the atom self aware of electo-magnetic covalent bonding. Its self aware of nothing else. The constuct is its bonding and the axioms are the properties of the atom. This is by far much simpler than a gene.
In the examples you give, there is no reason, whatsoever, to consider them self-aware. There is no decision making, on there part, that cannot be explained easier by deterministic behaviour.
Just so we don't argue at cross-definitions: Self-awareness - to be aware of one's own existense.
In this regards, then most apes are self-aware. Humans gain self-awareness at about the age of two. The test used for this involves a mirror. When the individual in front of the mirror realizes that the image is themselves, this is taken as 'de-facto' evidence of self-awareness. It is understood that they are self-aware, using this experiment, because their behaviour is markedly different from when they encounter another person/entity. Given this is what is used my the psycology papers I've read, it's the definition I use.
This property is, in no way, simple. It requires much brain/computation power. Machines have not yet attained any form of consciousness, much less self-awareness. This is not found in the simpler life forms.
Unless you can demonstrate the existence of a simple self-aware system, then I consider this dismissable on grounds that Occam's razor would deign it less rational.
Last edited: