Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

ieet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 175 posts

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#91

Post by cloverich »

Carwajalca wrote: post #74
zxcdw wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not responsible for the actions of the military. Just because they are born in US doesn't make them responsible for the actions of the US military any more than someoe born in Canada, Brazil or Japan. People who have power over the actions taken are responsible, pretty much the person itself and also the higher chain of command for the said person who commits whatever act to be held responsible for.

The military gets orders from politicians who get elected by US citizens.

Not to delve too deeply into a political debate, but I think a counter-point is fair:

1. Those elected officials are not elected by everyone - in the case of GWB's first term (which many probably think of in this military context) it wasn't even a majority that elected him.

2. Those that do elect officials have a very small choice (lets say 2-3 people who could practically be elected). Further, I'd argue that most only vote on a few key issues, while the elected official has dominion over a vast number of issues.

I don't hold citizens as not at all responsible, but I think its at least fair to argue (in the above context) that the elected officials bear more responsibility - and blame - than the everyday citizen.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#92

Post by edanm »

ggreer wrote: post #42

If I had to wager money on what future societies would condemn us for, I'd bet a lot on our treatment of animals. Even if other highly-encephalized animals aren't conscious, they are still open to a wide range of experiences that we can empathize with. They can learn and play. They feel hunger and pain. Some species can even form friendships and mourn the passing of their kin. Despite all indications that our treatme…

'If I had to wager money on what future societies would condemn us for, I'd bet a lot on our treatment of animals.'

This. Times a thousand.

Paul Graham's article "Frighteningly Ambitious Startup Ideas" has this quote, which I love:

"One of my tricks for generating startup ideas is to imagine the ways in which we'll seem backward to future generations. And I'm pretty sure that to people 50 or 100 years in the future, it will seem barbaric that people in our era waited till they had symptoms to be diagnosed with conditions like heart disease and cancer."

When I look to the future and imagine what will seem backwards, two of the big things in my mind are what PG mentions and what you mention.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#93

Post by alokm »

kretor wrote: post #88
alokm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not a petri dish he is referring to. He is talking about a brain implemented in silicon or graphene, i.e, a brain simulated on electronic hardware.

It doesn't matter what the brain is made of. Or would you say that if there are alien lifeforms, with their brains certainly made out of another matter than our brains, have no conscience?

I didn't mean that brain made up of silicon cannot be conscious. We are trying to simulate whatever we have learned about the brain. And that understanding is not complete. So implementing that in silicon (circuit) will not be conscious until we figure how to implement it.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#94

Post by frobbin »

bencollier49 wrote: post #23

That is actually the best summary of the current state of consciousness research that I've ever read. That said, they don't talk much about whether they can prove degrees of conscious awareness. There may be homologous structures, but are they as large as in humans? If they're not, then perhaps you'd expect the animal to have a comparable and yet less-detailed experience.

Agree with them that it is very likely that animals have conscious experience, I believe it to most likely be the case as well.

But it seems irresponsible, and possibly self-serving for the NCC research crowd, to escalate this evidence to the level of proof on consciousness in animals. There is just no way to know what it is like to be any creature other than yourself. It seems reasonable to assume other humans with the same anatomy and physiology, with whom we can communicate extensively, are also likely conscious. But we just can't ever tell what the experience is like to be any other creature.

Signing a such a statement smacks of an attempt at bullying policy with scientific credentials. This is bad because then in other areas, such as global warming, it gives opponents with ulterior motives fodder for claiming scientists shouldn't be trusted since they are prone to the same irrational belief systems as other people.

It would be better to present their story for mainstream consumption with an attitude of Isn't this a compelling story? Maybe even educate people and attract people to the field of neuroscience in the process. But claiming they've figured it out and we all need to get on board will only have negative repercussions.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#95

Post by stiff »

alokm wrote: post #66
scotty79 wrote: post #64

I think we are fairly close to achieving consciousness in silicon (graphene or whatever). We will improve algorithms, increase computing power and achieve system of consciousness of a mouse, then just by tossing in more computing power and optimizing speed of algorithms one of consciousness of a dog, then monkey, then human and then we'll be surprised that when we toss in even more computing power we'll get even more…

Consciousness is not solely a matter of computation. Even if we are able to simulate the brains of lesser beings, doesnt necessarily mean that there will be self awareness in the simulation. I think this is one area where we still have a lot of catching up to do.

Just to put such claims in perspective, people are currently struggling a lot to build reasonably accurate models of single neurons. We are at least decades away from simulations of any value even of rats. People who claim otherwise are the ones that haven't seen any actual biology...

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#97

Post by macca321 »

Swizec wrote: post #77
ggreer wrote: post #42

If I had to wager money on what future societies would condemn us for, I'd bet a lot on our treatment of animals. Even if other highly-encephalized animals aren't conscious, they are still open to a wide range of experiences that we can empathize with. They can learn and play. They feel hunger and pain. Some species can even form friendships and mourn the passing of their kin. Despite all indications that our treatme…

There's another part to this story. We have brought animals back from the brink of extinction purely because someone realised they were really tasty. A lot of our domestic animals, in particular, wouldn't even be able to survive without us ... but they're tasty, so we make them live, breed them in large numbers, feed them, etc. Isn't that what biologists call symbiosis?

I think I'd rather be extinct than be a battery hen.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#98

Post by oftenwrong »

zxcdw wrote: post #65
loceng wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the U.S.? Just because people are disconnected from the actions of their military doesn't mean they're not responsible

They are not responsible for the actions of the military. Just because they are born in US doesn't make them responsible for the actions of the US military any more than someoe born in Canada, Brazil or Japan. People who have power over the actions taken are responsible, pretty much the person itself and also the higher chain of command for the said person who commits whatever act to be held responsible for.

Every taxpayer is partly responsible for funding the actions of their country's military.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#99

Post by alokm »

brotchie wrote: post #89
alokm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consciousness is not solely a matter of computation. Even if we are able to simulate the brains of lesser beings, doesnt necessarily mean that there will be self awareness in the simulation. I think this is one area where we still have a lot of catching up to do.

12 months ago I would have strongly disagreed with your first sentence, but after a load of reading on Physics, Philosophy, and Neuroscience, my views have changed. I am still unable to reconcile my "internal" conscious experience with our current understanding of Physics. I'm a materialist, however I'm trending towards the believe that consciousness is an emergent physical property of massively interconnected system…

I also concur that "consciousness is an emergent physical property of massively interconnected systems". But "all matter has some degree of internal conscious experience" is really a philosophical question. Internet can be considered as a living being with different people acting as different components and communicating with each other the way neurons do. But is the internet as a whole, not its participants, conscious as a whole? That is a tough question.

I will try and read up the book you suggested. And I will point towards a very interesting theory I happened to have worked on (as a software developer) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Information_Theory which tries to quantify consciousnesses based on this interconnectedness.

Re: Prominent Scientists Sign Declaration that Animals have Conscious Awareness

#100

Post by [deleted] »

Carwajalca wrote: post #79
Swizec wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another part to this story. We have brought animals back from the brink of extinction purely because someone realised they were really tasty. A lot of our domestic animals, in particular, wouldn't even be able to survive without us ... but they're tasty, so we make them live, breed them in large numbers, feed them, etc. Isn't that what biologists call symbiosis?

Wolves do fairly well without humans, bees as well. Which animals did we bring back from the brink of extinction? I'll admit that new subspecies have emerged thanks to humans, but we hardly need to keep e.g. 1.3 billion cows ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle#Population ) just to save the species from extinction.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN