Reproducing conciousness

[Shadow]

Continuation of this thread:

 

Back when I was thinking about it I discussed it at length with my father, who has experience in the psychological/neurological field. But that was a long time ago, and I don't remember the arguments anymore. I wrote him a message, and I'll post his reply here.

 

 

From a purely layman point of view, I believe that you do need emotions for consciousness. When I think of the brain processing information, I divide it into 3 sub processes;

 

1. Input: Be that sensory input, some kind of experience, anything. I even consider a though to be an input, even though it's self generated.

2. Categorization: The brain runs the input through some "filters" to determine the category the input falls into. For example, if we take a bite from an apple, the input will be the taste, texture, etc. of the apple, among other things. That would then, in most people, fall into the categories "sweet", "solid", "juicy", maybe even "good". This is the part where emotions are necessary, because emotions are the filters I talked about earlier. It's also one of the most fundamental differences between your random person A and random person B. To some people (like person A), the taste of the apple will fall into the categories "good, tasty", to others (like person B) it will fall into the categories "bad, tasteless". The input is the same in both cases, but it is this part that changes the "output".

3. Storage in memory: Depending on the previous process, we will remember that apples are either good and tasty, or bad and tasteless. This will pretty much alter our future life, from little things such as "What will I have for desert today" to decisions like "Should I go to that 'Apple's only' party". Person A will go, and maybe meet the partner they will spend the rest of their life with. Person B won't, and as a result will get killed by an elephant getting dropped on his house from a plane. I'm sure you'll agree those are life altering situations. I know the examples were pretty lame, but the point was to express how even if person A was identical in every way to person B except for his tastes in fruit, the effect of that difference can be vast indeed. It also means that were it not for emotions, every person would be identical to the next one. Every single piece of information would be processed in the same manner. To be honest, I'm not even sure if a being without emotions could process information in the same way we do. Evey person having the same emotional responses to a given situation seems a little more "realistic" to me.

 

What has this to do with consciousness? Well, isn't consciousness, or at least a part of it, to be able to distinguish yourself from others? And self awareness as being aware of your uniqueness? And how do you distinguish yourself if you're not different from your neighbor?

 

This is just my opinion, and isn't backed by any solid evidence. It's just my thoughts on the subject. If one were to think of consciousness as being a state of mind that can only be achieved through millions of years of evolution and not be artificially reproduced, you can rest assured that were it not for emotions, namely fear, we would have died out long before we attained consciousness. Or one could make, for lack of a better term, a "religious" argument, saying "if it wasn't needed we wouldn't have it" which is quite frankly enough for me .

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Here's my father's reply:

 

Whew, I'm not sure what I said. The bottom line is probably this: consciousness (which is far from being fully explained or understood) is built on reflection - in the sense that we reflect on what we've felt, done, heard, said, etc. Reflection is built on experience (of the things we've felt, done heard, said, etc.) - and all of those involved emotions: nothing we feel, do, etc. is "free" of emotion unless there's been some damage to the brain's limbic system. The emotion may be greater (finding a solution to a problem) or lesser (doing a single, two-digit computation on the path to finding the solution), but it's always there.

[bascule]

Consciousness is built on what Hofstadter calls "strange loops", you could consider them to be feedbacks joined with some sort of mechanism that takes things up a level of abstraction. Physically these are manifested as cortico-thalamo-cortical loops, with the cortex providing additional levels of abstraction, or at least that's the theory I ascribe to.

 

It's my belief that reproducing consciousness in a computer will involve reproducing and understanding the complex connections between:

 

- the cortex: this has been implemented in software as part of the NuPIC software and the BlueBrain project

- the thalamus: no known software implementations to date, and its structure/function still remains largely a mystery, afaik

- the hippocampus: this is a comparatively easy-to-understand part of the brain whose function has now been modeled mathematically after slicing it up piece by piece

 

Combine all these pieces together, potentially with some ancillary structures like the amygdala and the locus coeruleus, and you'll begin to have the underpinnings of human-like consciousness.

[cameron marical]

Consciousness is built on what Hofstadter calls "strange loops", you could consider them to be feedbacks joined with some sort of mechanism that takes things up a level of abstraction. Physically these are manifested as cortico-thalamo-cortical loops, with the cortex providing additional levels of abstraction, or at least that's the theory I ascribe to.

 

I have never heard of that theory before, but it sounds simple. Has this been tested and implemented? Im guessing not, because we havent {Or at least I} havent seen any consciouss machines. {though Im not a nuerologist, and havent done much research in the feild}

 

Ive always pondered upon neural networks and artificial nueral networks for means of concioussness.

 

Whew, I'm not sure what I said. The bottom line is probably this: consciousness (which is far from being fully explained or understood) is built on reflection - in the sense that we reflect on what we've felt, done, heard, said, etc. Reflection is built on experience (of the things we've felt, done heard, said, etc.) - and all of those involved emotions: nothing we feel, do, etc. is "free" of emotion unless there's been some damage to the brain's limbic system. The emotion may be greater (finding a solution to a problem) or lesser (doing a single, two-digit computation on the path to finding the solution), but it's always there.

 

I like that thought process alot.

 

Although with this, we be able to maybe implant some senses to perceive what it {a computer} puts out and then have it stored into a data bank. Do you think that conscioussness would form? Something tells me theres more to it than just reflection, but I really dont know that much about conscioussness to say anything of the sort.

[Shadow]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be confusing reflection with memory. If I understand correctly, you want a computer to have "senses" and then for it to store the information perceived through those senses. That would be equivalent to taking a normal PC, plugging a webcam, microphone, some modification of a touch display etc. into it, and set it all to record. All that would ever happen is you're HD would filled up.

 

Another view on this I like, even though it's fiction, is presented in the novel Emergence by Ray Hammond.

[cameron marical]

Ya. Your right. My bad. I didnt think that one much through.

[iNow]

You're, not your.

[ydoaPs]

Consciousness is built on what Hofstadter calls "strange loops", you could consider them to be feedbacks joined with some sort of mechanism that takes things up a level of abstraction. Physically these are manifested as cortico-thalamo-cortical loops, with the cortex providing additional levels of abstraction, or at least that's the theory I ascribe to.

 

It's my belief that reproducing consciousness in a computer will involve reproducing and understanding the complex connections between:

 

- the cortex: this has been implemented in software as part of the NuPIC software and the BlueBrain project

- the thalamus: no known software implementations to date, and its structure/function still remains largely a mystery, afaik

- the hippocampus: this is a comparatively easy-to-understand part of the brain whose function has now been modeled mathematically after slicing it up piece by piece

 

Combine all these pieces together, potentially with some ancillary structures like the amygdala and the locus coeruleus, and you'll begin to have the underpinnings of human-like consciousness.

Bascule here pretty much nailed it, imo.

 

Our minds are analogous to computer programming. we can look at computer programming from various levels. You can look it it from the low level of electrons moving about on wires. In the same manner, you can look at the brain as ion currents through neurons. At a higher level, you have logic gates in computers and neural hierarchies in the brain. Then you have higher level programming like python. The analog in the brain is an idea.

Our actions, our choices, are all based upon our beliefs, our values, preconcieved notions, etc. It's algorithmic(albeit VERY complicated). All of these things come at the lowest level from deterministic physics(the brain is a classical system).

 

Our consciousness comes from a thin covering of the "old brain" called the neocortex. It works hierarchically(with many more feedback connections than feedforward) to produce a working model of the world. Instead of creating trillions of files to save what every object looks like under every condition(that would be utterly ridiculous as the pattern on your retina is never the same) the cortical-thalamo-cortical loops use a time delay to form invariant auto-associative memories which are used recursively in hierarchical feedback loops to provide a model of our world. This is how our senses are cleaned up. For example, these auto-associative memories fill in our blind spot. This model is what we experience. Most of our experiences are what we expect to experience rather than what we actually experience. Consciousness is what it feels like to have a working neocortex(or analogous structure).

 

The following is a great lecture by Jeff Hawkins on the topic.

 

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=8C245B988EC37E6D

 

I just don't see what would make emotions necessary for consciousness.

[bascule]

I just don't see what would make emotions necessary for consciousness.

 

Amygdalae appear to play a role in the formation of memory, and are very much influenced by emotion.

 

Note that amygdalae are suspected as the cause of both autism and schizophrenia

[ydoaPs]

Amygdalae appear to play a role in the formation of memory, and are very much influenced by emotion.

 

Note that amygdalae are suspected as the cause of both autism and schizophrenia

 

Surely we could come up with another way to store memory.

[iNow]

Of course you could, but... with us...emotion is what makes a memory more profound... it makes the memory change future behavior and decisions.

 

The emotion is fed from hormones like adrenaline and neurotransmitters like dopamine. We could waste all of our mental capacity remembering every single detail of our lives, but instead we put a valence on them with our emotions. Some stand out more than others, and for good reason.

 

We nearly avoid a car wreck and get a surge of emotion. We then remember better the factors which led us to nearly get into that wreck so as to not repeat the same mistake in the future.

 

We have a fight with our girlfriend, we are emotional and remember what we did that led to the fight... or, what we did to lose the fight... and the emotion makes us better NEXT time.

 

Emotion is the base of it all. We remember the happy parties and the depressing times, because the ability to do so prepares us for later experiences. It's only when emotion is NOT present that we tend NOT to remember stuff.

 

Sure... we could just design a cold computer like memory for all possible events, but some events ought to have a greater "weight." If you want to explore this, you will need to account for that. How do you place a greater weight/importance on things which should be... in fact... more important?

 

 

The emotion came first in our brains. It's related to the reptilian brain, and is evolutionarily older than the cortex and critical thinking skills. Emotion came first... then memory built on top of that... then problem solving and critical thinking on top of that... These are all layers to the cake, and all you have is dough or flour if you remove any of the layers.

 

I'm just saying... You're talking about consciousness. Emotion plays a crucial role in deciding the things about which we're conscious or to which we're attentive.

[bascule]

Surely we could come up with another way to store memory.

 

We could... I think the important thing to remember about the brain is that it's made up of a few large macrostructures which implement the majority of the function and tons of tons of microstructures (most inherited from the limbic system, a.k.a. the "reptillian brain") which provide tuning or specific functions which are essential to consciousness or the way the conscious parts of our brain interact with the world.

 

While it's possible to build a brain without them, I think any attempts at AI are going to have to start with them in place until we can empirically determine which brain structures are "unnecessary" or could function in a different way.

 

Emotion is pretty central to the way human consciousness works. I imagine a conscious entity without emotion would function much like an autistic, perhaps able to understand complex patterns in the world but unable to relate to other people. I hope the first conscious entity we create is able to communicate with other humans as if it were a human itself

[cameron marical]

I agree that emotions are very helpfull in memories, and very helpfull in survival, not to mention enjoying life itself.

 

But, I agree in that I do not think that emotions are a hard-core necessitie in concioussness. Emotions, beign as usefull as they are, do not need to be preasent for cognitive states of being in my opinion.

 

I may be wrong though.

[Shadow]

You're, not your.

 

Noticed it about 3 seconds before I read your post

 

But, I agree in that I do not think that emotions are a hard-core necessitie in concioussness. Emotions, beign as usefull as they are, do not need to be preasent for cognitive states of being in my opinion.

 

That depends on how you define consciousness. And that really applies to all the posts. IMO, consciousness, as in 'the thing in humans' includes emotion. If you want to talk about Consciousness v1.01a which does not include emotion, then fine, but I think this is an extremely important distinction, if only because I just cannot fathom an emotionless consciousness.

 

By the way, anyone ever heard of Pribram?

[bascule]

I just cannot fathom an emotionless consciousness.

 

I can, and it's devoid and meaningless...

[cameron marical]

I can, and it's devoid and meaningless...

 

Why do you think that? I am not saying that your veiw is wrong, just questioning.

 

I think that an emotionless consciousness is not meaningless, we could make it have a better memory and have it surpass humans, it could benifit humanity in many ways in my opinion.

 

Thanks Bascule and YdoaPs for the info and the videos by the way.I downloaded them all. I tried to give you rep points YdoaPs, but I guess I gave you some recently or something because it doesnt let me.

[Shadow]

Why do you think that? I am not saying that your veiw is wrong, just questioning.

 

I think that an emotionless consciousness is not meaningless, we could make it have a better memory and have it surpass humans, it could benifit humanity in many ways in my opinion.

 

Thanks Bascule and YdoaPs for the info and the videos by the way.I downloaded them all. I tried to give you rep points YdoaPs, but I guess I gave you some recently or something because it doesnt let me.

 

It as in the consciousness? Or it as in the being harboring that consciousness? In any case, I agree with bascule. Try to spend today thinking about which of your decisions and memories aren't influenced by emotion. If you come back with three examples I'll concede your point. You need emotion. You need it for prioritizing, for filtering, for remembering and even for forgetting, or so I would assume. Yes, a being without emotion may be better in some ways, but what good would that be in the case we're discussing? We're talking about human consciousness. Not a robot that will act as our neutral personal diary. To talk about a human consciousness without emotion is about as meaningless as talking about a home computer without a graphics card. Yes, we could use that extra space for another processor, but that's not the point.

[bascule]

Emotion plays a huge part in social interaction. Do you think it's just a coincidence that the same part of our brain which recognizes faces also couples emotions with memories?

 

Socialization is how we acquire natural language as well as world knowledge. They also stimulate us to various forms of action.

 

While I think it might be possible to create an entity with consciousness comparable to a human while remaining devoid of emotion, I really can't fathom how such a being would behave or interact.

[Shadow]

I don't think it would. I don't think it could. Not unless preprogrammed with the appropriate responses.

 

I wonder if a being devoid of emotions would retain the ability to learn...?

[cameron marical]

We're talking about human consciousness

I thought that we were talking about conscioussness in general. My mistake.

 

Emotion plays a huge part in social interaction. Do you think it's just a coincidence that the same part of our brain which recognizes faces also couples emotions with memories?

I didnt even know that they did. Thanks for the info.

 

Although, does that{the part of the brain that recognizes...} really make it needed for consciousness? Does that not just make it so you can recognize a person and also have an opinion about them? We dont need to judge people to socialize do we?

 

Socialization is how we acquire natural language as well as world knowledge

What about through experience? Maybe the natural language is socialization dependant, but world knowledge can be accumulated through plenty of others than only socialization, as it is.

Why exactly does socialization need emotions?

Is curiosity emotion dependant?

 

It as in the consciousness? Or it as in the being harboring that consciousness?

The being.

 

Try to spend today thinking about which of your decisions and memories aren't influenced by emotion. If you come back with three examples I'll concede your point.

I cant really do that because AFAIK, no one knows exactly what makes up conscioussness, and since your memories are mostly connected with emotions, its kind of tough. {but I did try}

 

While I think it might be possible to create an entity with consciousness comparable to a human while remaining devoid of emotion, I really can't fathom how such a being would behave or interact.

I agree. I am only focusing learning and on whether or not it is possible for something to be consciouss without emotions, not how usefull or good at interacting with its environment or others consciouss beings would be.

Edited June 26, 2009 by cameron marical

[GDG]

IIRC, there are clinical cases of people who, due to trauma or disease (including severe depression), are rendered essentially emotionless. They remain conscious, and are able to learn and remember. However, they find it almost impossible to make decisions, to plan or schedule things. Apparently, deciding what to do -- what you want to do -- is an inherently emotional process.

 

Based on that, I would conclude that emotion is not necessary to maintain consciousness. However, consciousness without emotion does not appear to be very useful.

[bascule]

When it really comes down to it the human model (and the mammalian model in general) is proven workable, and any other models are just speculation.

 

I attribute failures in AI advancement to trying to reinvent consciousness from the ground up rather than trying to copy the human model and then tweak it.