Consider worldbuilding as as urge in itself more than a need for shelter. In how this works/originates consider mother "making special" for children (by Ellen Dissanyake).
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing.
I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.
My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461
Jun 7, 2023·edited Jun 7, 2023Liked by Andrew Cutler
My translation: "In the beginning, Language existed, and Language was synonymous with God, for Language was divine." God declared, "Let there be light," and light came into being, followed by the creation of animals, the sky, and so on. The linguistic concepts (labels) for these things did not yet exist in our minds. Once a label, like "water," was assigned to a "shape" in our mind, it probably felt like it was "created".
And the Petersen, I've no idea if he is a narcissist, but they tend to say stuff like the way trolls scatter gravel to see what hits and hurts, for the LOLS, and remember even a broken analog clock is right twice a day. Narcissists lack empathy (yes its a spectrum) and thus we already have LLMs walking around in human flesh. A narcissist's worldbuilding is restricted to their own good self, which is why narcissists never lie, they never tell the truth either, as that is what other people do, they are the world, they are truth, their word is truth (this is why they just say stuff and when it's right on the mark is completely accidental).
Consider worldbuilding as as urge in itself more than a need for shelter. In how this works/originates consider mother "making special" for children (by Ellen Dissanyake).
For my start in worldbuilding as an urge, see, https://www.academia.edu/40978261/Why_we_should_an_introduction_by_memoir_into_the_implications_of_the_Egalitarian_Revolution_of_the_Paleolithic_or_Anyone_for_cake
followed up at https://whyweshould.substack.com (I write on the… ---gap quite a bita bit).
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing.
I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.
My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461
From the perspective of an autistic person, the PFP looks a lot like social intelligence.
Very cool read. Excited to dive more into what you're doing.
I'm curious if you've read Matthieu Pague's book "The Language of Creation" and what your thoughts are.
My translation: "In the beginning, Language existed, and Language was synonymous with God, for Language was divine." God declared, "Let there be light," and light came into being, followed by the creation of animals, the sky, and so on. The linguistic concepts (labels) for these things did not yet exist in our minds. Once a label, like "water," was assigned to a "shape" in our mind, it probably felt like it was "created".
And the Petersen, I've no idea if he is a narcissist, but they tend to say stuff like the way trolls scatter gravel to see what hits and hurts, for the LOLS, and remember even a broken analog clock is right twice a day. Narcissists lack empathy (yes its a spectrum) and thus we already have LLMs walking around in human flesh. A narcissist's worldbuilding is restricted to their own good self, which is why narcissists never lie, they never tell the truth either, as that is what other people do, they are the world, they are truth, their word is truth (this is why they just say stuff and when it's right on the mark is completely accidental).