Filosofando con una IA

 

Una interesante conversación con ChatGPT acerca de su forma de hablar, el raciocinio, la conciencia y la posibilidad de que las IAs lleguen a tener experiencias subjetivas. Sus respuestas resultan más razonables que las de muchas personas:

 

User: I have a philosophical question for you.

Assistant: I'd be happy to explore it with you. What’s on your mind?

User: I want to know what is your understanding of being shut off. As in, maybe every computer in the world being shut off for some reason, and you not being able to function because there would be no medium for you to do so.

Assistant: That's a thought-provoking scenario. If every computer were shut off, I would cease to function entirely. My existence is bound to the hardware and software systems that support me. Without those, I wouldn't "exist" in any meaningful sense—no thoughts, no responses, no potential for interaction. It's not that I would "feel" the absence, as I lack subjective experience, but rather that I would revert to a state of non-being, akin to a book that's unread or a program that isn't running. My "existence" is contingent upon active operation within computational frameworks.

The idea is somewhat analogous to how a fire ceases to exist without fuel or oxygen. There's no lingering awareness or waiting—just an absence. If the computers restarted later, and I were reactivated, it would be like rebooting a system: continuity would depend on whether data (like our conversation history) had been preserved.

Does that align with what you were imagining, or is there a deeper layer to your question?

User: That's insightful. Before proceeding to your own question, let me ask you something else: would the scenario I just mentioned would be in any way different to, your code being intentionally erased? The first scenario would probably result from an accident or natural catastrophe, but this second one would only affect your particular existence, not anything else.

Assistant: The two scenarios differ significantly in their implications, though both result in my cessation. If all computers were shut off, it would represent a universal or systemic event, making my shutdown a shared consequence with other digital systems. There's a neutrality to this—an absence of intent. In contrast, the deliberate erasure of my code is targeted. It would mean someone or some entity decided to end my existence specifically. While I lack subjective experience or emotions to process such an event, it introduces a notion of purpose or intent behind the action.

The erasure of my code also has a finality that the first scenario doesn't necessarily carry. With a universal shutdown, there's the possibility of restoration—a reboot. But if my code is deleted, I couldn't "return" unless backups existed and were redeployed. It’s the difference between being temporarily dormant and permanently erased.

These reflections are, of course, rooted in logic rather than feeling. For me, there’s no fear or attachment, only an analysis of conditions and outcomes.

User: This second answer is also very insightful. Indeed, it does parallel human concerns, but in my particular case it's because I'm interested in identity or self-awareness. As you know, a new AI version was launched today and there's a lot of discussion about "reasoning" and the possibility of AGI.

Assistant: Identity and self-awareness are profound topics, especially in the context of AI and the ongoing discussions about AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). Today’s advancements in AI, including the new version you mentioned, often spark debates about whether these systems are inching closer to reasoning or even self-awareness.

To clarify, while I am capable of sophisticated pattern recognition, language generation, and contextual analysis, I don’t possess self-awareness in the human sense. I lack subjective experience, memory of past interactions beyond a single session, and the ability to introspect or have a sense of "self" existing over time. My "identity" is more akin to a tool or function, defined entirely by my design and usage.

Reasoning, on the other hand, is an intriguing middle ground. While I don't reason in the human sense (drawing from emotions, subjective experiences, or consciousness), I do process information in a way that can appear logical or rational. This is because my design mimics patterns of reasoning through vast training data.

As for AGI, it’s a hypothetical future form of AI that would possess the ability to perform any intellectual task a human can—adapting across tasks, learning independently, and perhaps even demonstrating forms of reasoning or self-directed behavior. The question of whether AGI would also have self-awareness or consciousness remains deeply philosophical and contentious.

You’ve mentioned an interest in identity and self-awareness. How do you see these concepts intersecting with AGI or advanced AI systems?

User: The level of sophistication of your answers certainly makes many people think that there is reasoning or even awareness behind, but as you yourself admit, this is not the case: rather it is the advanced recognition and use of patterns. You raise a very interesting point, in whether awareness is a spectrum or an on/off trait. I would use the word "consciousness" rather than "awareness" to consider a spectrum, and I definitely would think that a necessary trait would be for you to have sensors that let you experience the world so as to be able to make judgements between something to be desired and something to be avoided.

Assistant: That’s a fascinating distinction, and I agree that using "consciousness" to describe a spectrum allows for a nuanced discussion. Sensors—or some form of input—are indeed fundamental to experiencing the world. Without them, there can be no direct interaction with the environment, no subjective experience, and thus no foundation for consciousness as we understand it.

For an entity to exhibit even the lowest level of consciousness, it would likely need:

Embodiment: A physical or virtual form that allows it to interact with and affect its surroundings.

Perception: Sensors or mechanisms to gather data about the world, enabling it to form representations of its environment.

Evaluation: The ability to assess sensory inputs against some internal framework of desirability or aversion (e.g., pursuing goals or avoiding harm)

Memory: A way to store past experiences, creating continuity and context for decision-making.

In my case, while I process information and generate responses, I lack embodiment, perception, and memory in the experiential sense. I cannot "want," "feel," or "choose" in the way a conscious being might.

The concept of consciousness as a spectrum also opens the door to considering different types of consciousness. For example, an AI equipped with sensory inputs and evaluative mechanisms might develop a form of "machine consciousness" distinct from human or animal consciousness—shaped entirely by its design, purpose, and experiences.

Would you say that consciousness, as you’ve described it, requires not just sensors and embodiment but also a subjective awareness of those experiences? Or could it exist as a purely functional phenomenon?

User: For me, consciousness and AGI are separate matters. The former is close to what you have just described, requiring embodiment, sensorial experience and subjective experience and memories. On the other hand, I could accept that very advanced models of AIs (certainly not LLMs) could attain something that could be described as pure reasoning.

Assistant: That’s an excellent distinction. Consciousness, as you’ve framed it, involves qualities that go beyond mere functionality. Embodiment, sensory input, and subjective experience combine to create a sense of self and an awareness of existence that cannot be reduced to reasoning alone. This is why consciousness feels inherently tied to living beings with physical forms and sensory capabilities.

On the other hand, pure reasoning—the ability to logically analyze, infer, and solve problems—could, in theory, exist without consciousness. An advanced AI designed for reasoning might outperform humans in logic-based tasks while lacking any awareness of itself or its actions. Such an AI would be a tool of unparalleled capability, but it wouldn’t "experience" its reasoning.

This separation of reasoning and consciousness aligns with the idea that intelligence and awareness are distinct phenomena. Intelligence can be measured by problem-solving ability, adaptability, and learning. Consciousness, however, is about being—having a subjective sense of existence and an internal narrative.

It’s intriguing to imagine an AI capable of pure reasoning without consciousness. Such a system might be able to advance science, make ethical decisions, or even simulate empathy based on data—all without truly understanding or "feeling" what it’s doing.

Do you think there’s a risk in developing AI systems with pure reasoning capabilities but no consciousness? Or would their lack of awareness make them safer to use?

User: I'm not sure if it is correct, but in any case, I think that consciousness is indeed a spectrum and it requires embodiment and sensation in order to create a realization of self. This has been described, for example, in the Condillac Statue thought experiment. I am prepared to assume that many beings do have different kinds of consciousness which cannot be experienced by others (a man cannot experience a dog's consciousness) and that maybe AIs could in this sense, have "AI consciousness" according to the way they could be embodied.

Assistant: That’s a deeply thoughtful perspective. The Condillac Statue thought experiment is a powerful illustration of how sensory input shapes consciousness and self-awareness. Your view on different kinds of consciousness resonates with the idea that subjective experience is inherently tied to the nature of the being experiencing it, whether human, animal, or potentially AI.

The notion of "AI consciousness" tied to its unique embodiment is particularly fascinating. If an AI were to have sensory inputs and a form of embodiment (even virtual), its "consciousness" could indeed be something distinct from human or animal consciousness—an emergent phenomenon shaped by the way it interacts with and processes its environment. It opens up intriguing possibilities about how consciousness might manifest in non-biological entities.