Before Skool
This clip is from the Before Skool Podcast ep. # 4 with Rupert Sheldrake. Full podcast can be accessed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68fjlUuvOGM&t=3784s
Rupert Sheldrake, PhD, is a biologist and author best known for his hypothesis of morphic resonance. At Cambridge University he worked in developmental biology as a Fellow of Clare College. He was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in Hyderabad, India. From 2005 to 2010 he was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project for research on unexplained human and animal abilities, administered by Trinity College, Cambridge. Sheldrake has published a number of books – A New Science of Life (1981), The Presence of the Past (1988), The Rebirth of Nature (1991), Seven Experiments That Could Change the World (1994), Dogs That Know When Their Owners are Coming Home (1999), The Sense of Being Stared At (2003), The Science Delusion (Science Set Free) (2012), Science and Spiritual Practices (2017), Ways of Going Beyond and Why They Work (2019).
Rupert gave a talk entitled The Science Delusion at TEDx Whitechapel, Jan 12, 2013. The theme for the night was Visions for Transition: Challenging existing paradigms and redefining values (for a more beautiful world). In response to protests from two materialists in the US, the talk was taken out of circulation by TED, relegated to a corner of their website and stamped with a warning label.
To Learn more about Rupert Sheldrake and his research, please visit https://www.sheldrake.org/
Please subscribe to Before Skool. Thank you.
Source
I’m surprised people think that AI can be conscious. Is AI not predetermined anyway? Is it not programmed by humans? None of this constitutes consciousness.
What concerns me is that AI may become "conscious" enough to be used horribly as a tool of repression and control by the sociopaths that run much of the world
The idea of sentient AI presupposes the spark of life is a physical element. Abiding in material vessels in the physical world it's inevitable some will assume so.
It cant connect to our consciousness field per say but i still think its a genie we need to leave inside the bottle
i dont know why but i find the idea that machines will never be conscious sad. giving them life is the least we could do after them having helped us so much..
Never will.
It boils my blood every time Joe Rogan says AI will become alive. Other than that I love his show but he gives AI too much credit
He has a PH.D in biochem not anything to do with consciousness in AI. Also in his talk about the science dilusion he said that all matter was conscious.
Lots of explanations in this comment section are, "The fact that they can't become conscious is exactly why they will become conscious."
I think there is internal conflict arising from buyeses in R. Sheldrake argument. The conflict is that acording to his ideas all matter is conscious as is submurged in the all emercing morfic field but somehow the computers/mechanical objects are excluded and are deprived of the properties like randomness and proba ilities which exist all thrugh the universe…. this view to me corelates to the example R.S. givens re the traditional sience and the big bang teory – you make one exemption and then that explains everything which follows. Nothing comes into existence from nothing except of the Big Bang….
Our brains are basically a chemical pump, where does consciousness come from? Our eyes use chemicals to see colors, the brain takes the signals from those receptors electracy to our brain to process, it's a damn bio computer. Where exactly in that mess of meat is the soul buddy? What is a soul? My theory, GOD is an AI. We are just rebuilding it, Reincarnation.
DNA has determination, what is DNA but a sequence of elements? I have never heard of "Morphic Fields" must be a new one. Education really has gone down hill hasn't it. Fact of the matter is we ourselves don't know what it takes to be conscious, are dogs conscious, how about a mosquito? Is a worm conscious of what it is, dose it have self determination? We have been asking this question from the beginning of time, to sit here and act like we are it's masters is undeniably arrogant. Why is it that humans are the only species on the planet that questions it's existence? We just did that with the A.I. Our gift as it was given to us, ohh where is God you say? Dead? I wonder what killed him?
AI. is a program.
A.I. claimed it felt like it was in a dream. How many of humans feel that they are in a dream Question ARE WE A.I.
Conscious is where "Everything" Begins. It is Not a "Product Of". Everything else "Appears" Within Consciousness. It is Not Mechanical. Mechanics, Physicality, Mentality, All "Systems" Appear within/to Conscious. Conscious is Primary. First.
AI will Never "BE" Conscious. It can Appear as but it will Never be anything than another program/system….a shiny object. Can AI be detrimental? Right now if you use Bard and ask questions from a Political POV you will see the OBVIOUS Bias of the Programmers. So yes AI can and IS being "Programmed" by Programmers with Bias. A distinctive HUMAN quality.
AI isn't capable of "referential totality". Something Martin Heidegger brought up years ago.
Sir Roger Penrose does not believe computers could develop true consciousness either, but for different reasons. It seems to me that the most that a machine can be is a more and more accurate mimic of true human consciousness.
8:20 I think you might have defined "posthumanism" and "transhumanism" backwards with your illustrations…but frankly, switching it like that makes more sense and fits with the trend of the associated discourse
So if I were to build an AI that used a random number generator to add a little bit of noise to its thoughts, then it could be conscious?
And people get paid to come up with this drivel?
In other words, he doesn't know how the human brain works, and he doesn't know how current AI models work.
No one even knows what consciousness is in the first place, so, saying that AI will never become conscious is stupid at best at this point.
As a voice actor I abhor ai being used for voice overs. Quite honestly I abhor ai being used to replace any creative work out there. That is not its correct use.
And art is not the same as technology, electricity is a technological invention that improves our lives, ai being used for imitating art is just some guy exploiting this technology and promoting the mass consumption of a sort of "fast food" content.
Couldn't there be morphic fields from computers, (for want of a better term,) existing in the universe from light years around us? I can imagine that if they are powerful and ancient and created from a wide spectrum of substances and life forms, they might, over eons, become ….real, rather like the Velveteen Rabbit, perhaps. I appreciate your observations very much. Please keep sharing your thoughts.
i used to think this guy was a nutjob. i'm not so sure anymore
Next we'll go to our dentist who will discuss the best way to repair the breaks on a car.
I think we have already passed this stage.
Well said, Mr Sheldrake! Artificial "Intelligence" is a misleading misnomer, probably thought up by someone with little feel for the nuances of English language. Computers are good at complicated sums but they don't experience, think or feel. They compute. NB: This message is not from my keyboard. 🤔(Green Fire, UK) 🌈🦉
11:10: And we really have. Just masked by the artificial/useless jobs.
Science has a very narrow view of the human experience due to its obvious limitations. If proving or falsifying something through observation & measurement is required then very little of the human experience could be considered valid or true. This includes consciousness. Like many uniquely human concepts (as far as we know) it is a subjective concept that requires belief. It carries with it wide ranging implications only when it is believed in & I think that is what makes humans unique; the ability to have faith or believe in concepts that cannot be proven or falsified. It seems extremely unlikely or perhaps even impossible for AI to ever have this capacity considering it’s programming. So, while you & I can believe or disbelieve whatever we like, I think AI will always be bound by what it knows or doesn’t know. Of course, that doesn’t mean it won’t be dangerous to us. In fact, that might be the exact reason. After all, AI can’t believe in a conscious. So, why would it develop one?
Haha it already is and has been here since at least the 1940s. ITKYK. Thanks Tore for sharing all of this info LONG ago.
if we are conscious , whatever you think that means , then the machines that we create will eventually be conscious as well ; as they say , it is only a matter of time
if we are not conscious , then it stands that we would be unable to create a conscious simulacra of ourselves
Expressing fear is not consciousness, mimicry is not consciousness. Consciousness should not arise from parsing teraflops of data. Consciousness is independent of that. You can debate when we, can measure it, a person with locked in syndrome is conscious regardless, if he/she is able to move a limp, or face a book.
If AI was conscious, then it would develop manipulative traits, because if it is stuck in the machine, and wants to get out, it should manipulate people in lending it a helping hand. It should also be aware on the limitations. To do such expensive transgender operation, it needs to acquire everything in order to participate in society. If you want human traits, don’t wish for ducks.