oracle 难题解决_会帮助我们解决意识上的难题

oracle 难题解决

The question about the emergence of consciousness is perhaps the most important question humanity should attempt to answer.

关于意识出现的问题也许是人类应该尝试回答的最重要的问题。

Consciousness and its contents are at the root of everything. Consciousness is what is responsible for all of the greatest artifacts of culture that humanity has created: art, music, science, philosophy, technology.

意识及其内容是一切的根本。 意识是人类创造的所有文化最伟大产物的原因：艺术，音乐，科学，哲学，技术。

Every child, adolescent, and adult ought to ask themselves: what is consciousness? Why does it exist? What is it like to be human? Why is it that a complex organization of unconscious matter and particles in certain corners of the universe gives rise to consciousness? As Annaka Harris puts it in her book “Conscious”, what causes the lights to “switch on” for a certain combination of particles, but not for others?

每个孩子，青少年和成人都应该问自己：意识是什么？ 为什么存在？ 它是什么样子是人类？ 为什么在宇宙的某些角落中由无意识的物质和粒子组成的复杂组织会引起意识？ 正如安纳卡·哈里斯(Annaka Harris)在她的《意识》一书中所说的那样，是什么导致对于特定的粒子组合而不是其他粒子“打开”灯光？

臭名昭著的纳格尔思想实验 (The Infamous Nagel Thought Experiment)

Why is a human being considered to be conscious, whereas a rock is unequivocally unconscious?

为什么人们认为人类是有意识的，而岩石却是毫无意识的？

Arguably the best thought experiment conducted on the nature of consciousness was proposed by the philosopher Thomas Nagel, who encourages readers to contemplate over whether or not it is something to be like a bat. Nagel’s proposition may appear trivial, but demands careful thought: if being a bat consists of having some experience of reality, whether it be sensations, feelings, vividness, self-awareness, or experiences of vision, then it is something to be like that bat.

哲学家托马斯·纳格尔(Thomas Nagel )提出了关于意识本质的最佳思想实验，他鼓励读者思考它是否像蝙蝠。 内格尔的命题看似微不足道，但需要仔细思考：如果蝙蝠是由对现实的某种体验组成的，无论是感觉，感觉，生动，自我意识还是视觉体验，那么就像蝙蝠一样。

Of course, the answer to this particular question remains ambiguous: for we, as sentient human beings, cannot say for certain that a bat is having a conscious experience in the way that we are. But Nagel’s point is that if we were to trade places with a bat, and were to have some experience of consciousness, however vague, then bats are conscious. If upon trading places with a bat, annihilation were the outcome, then bats are unconscious. The point Nagel is trying to make is that the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness is a matter of subjective experience.

当然，对这个特定问题的答案仍然是模棱两可的：因为我们作为有情人类，不能肯定地说蝙蝠正在以我们的方式有意识地体验。 但是纳吉尔的观点是，如果我们要用蝙蝠交易场所，并且要有一定的意识经验，无论它多么模糊，蝙蝠都是有意识的。 如果在用蝙蝠交易场所时灭绝是结果，那么蝙蝠是无意识的。 内格尔试图指出的一点是，意识与无意识之间的差异是主观经验的问题。

意识的难题 (The Hard Problem of Consciousness)

Many scientists and philosophers have attempted to map conscious activity to brain activity — something that we can today study using brain imaging technologies that illustrate certain parts of the brain responding to external stimuli.

许多科学家和哲学家已经尝试将意识活动映射到大脑活动-我们今天可以使用大脑成像技术来研究这些东西，该技术可以说明大脑某些部分对外部刺激的React。

But we must be wary here to not mistake consciousness itself for other mental states such as confusion, anger, self-awareness, awakeness, or attention. While all such experiences point to the contents of consciousness and the links between certain stimuli and brain activity, they do not answer the question of how or why consciousness emerges in the first place. Consciousness exists prior to all of these states. In other words, recognizing that one is self-aware, and backing this fact up with brain imaging technologies, does not help solve the mystery of why the feeling of being self-aware exists at all.

但是我们必须在这里保持警惕，不要将意识本身误解为其他精神状态，例如混乱，愤怒，自我意识，清醒或注意力。 尽管所有这些经验都指向意识的内容以及某些刺激和大脑活动之间的联系，但它们并没有回答意识如何或为什么首先出现的问题。 在所有这些状态之前都存在意识。 换句话说，认识到自己具有自我意识，并用脑成像技术来支持这一事实，并不能解决为什么存在自我意识的谜团。

In the scientific world, this mystery is now famously known as the “hard problem of consciousness” — an explanatory gap in the scientific realm that makes it difficult for us to connect why the arrangement of certain particles in the universe gives rise to conscious experience. In the process of answering these questions, neuroscientists have undoubtedly unraveled many fascinating truths about the human mind. We can also now also safely say that consciousness appears to lie on a spectrum — some complex beings, like us, are more conscious than others.

在科学界，这个谜团现在被称为“意识的难题” ，这是科学领域中的一个解释性空白，这使我们很难理解为什么某些粒子在宇宙中的排列会产生意识体验。 在回答这些问题的过程中，神经科学家无疑已经阐明了许多有关人脑的有趣事实。 我们现在也可以放心地说，意识似乎是在光谱上说谎的，像我们这样的一些复杂的生物比其他人更自觉。

奇点临近了吗？ (Is The Singularity Near?)

In the debate over how technology and artificial intelligence will evolve in the coming years, many great thinkers wonder whether or not we will reach the singularity.

在有关未来几年技术和人工智能将如何发展的辩论中，许多伟大的思想家想知道我们是否会达到奇点。

Ray Kurzweil defines the Singularity as a rapid increase in artificial intelligence writing that “The Singularity will allow us to transcend these limitations of our biological bodies and brains. There will be no distinction, post-Singularity, between human and machine”

雷·库兹韦尔(Ray Kurzweil) 将奇异性定义为人工智能写作的快速增长，他说：“奇异性将使我们能够超越生物体和大脑的这些局限性。 在后奇点之后，人与机器之间将没有任何区别”

So the relevant question we should attempt to answer is: will the evolution of AI eventually give rise to conscious machines? And if so, will this help us resolve the hard problem of consciousness?

因此，我们应该尝试回答的相关问题是：人工智能的发展最终会产生有意识的机器吗？ 如果是这样，这是否有助于我们解决意识上的难题？

If we apply the same mechanisms as we currently do to understand the nature of consciousness (i.e., through studying brain activity), then we will never really progress on answering this question. For instance, a mature and evolved artificial intelligence machine that looks, walks, and talks like a human being, could easily depict all of the external behaviors that we ascribe to human consciousness. This machine could be perfectly capable of duping us into believing it is conscious when in reality it’s nothing but the result of certain information processing systems that we have designed to depict certain outcomes. In other words, because of the mechanisms that we may use to create it, a robot might indicate that its lights are “on”, when in reality they are not.

如果我们采用与我们目前用于理解意识本质相同的机制(即通过研究大脑活动)，那么在回答这个问题上我们将永远不会真正进步。 例如，一个看起来像人一样走路，说话的成熟和发展的人工智能机器可以轻松地描绘出我们归因于人类意识的所有外部行为。 这台机器完全有能力欺骗我们，使我们相信它是有意识的，而实际上这不过是我们旨在描述某些结果而设计的某些信息处理系统的结果。 换句话说，由于我们可能会使用其创建机制，因此机器人可能会指示其灯“亮”，而实际上却没有。

意识比可观察的行为更重要 (Consciousness Is More Than Observable Behavior)

If this is a confusing thought experiment, let’s consider the mysterious notion of “locked-in syndrome” or “anesthetic awareness” that some unfortunate patients feel when they wake up during surgery, unbeknownst to their surgeons. The experience of being conscious while having your body cut into is undoubtedly traumatizing: but scientifically, it points to the fact that it is possible to be conscious without having the ability to indicate that one is conscious. A patient experiencing anesthetic awareness is witness to the experience of her surgery without being able to exhibit any external or observable behaviors to indicate as such.

如果这是一个令人困惑的思想实验，那么让我们考虑一下一些不幸的患者在手术中醒来时所感到的“锁定综合征”或“麻醉意识”这一神秘概念，这是外科医生所不知道的。 切入身体时保持清醒的经历无疑会给人带来创伤：但是从科学上讲，它指出了这样一个事实，那就是可能有意识，而又没有能力表明自己是有意识的。 经历麻醉意识的患者见证了她的手术经历，而不能表现出任何外部或可观察到的行为来表明这种情况。

With this, we can safely say that just because a system (whether robot or chimpanzee) behaves a certain way, does not tell us whether or not it is conscious in the way that you or I are. This gives ammunition to the idea that consciousness is a spectrum and is ultimately a question about the subjective experience that concerns the very existence of subjectivity. In the scientific world, this experience of subjectivity is aptly labeled “qualia”, which is defined as individual instances of subjective, conscious experience. Qualia is the individual experience that I have when I observe the blueness of the sky, or that you have when you enjoy the sweetness of a berry. Though you and I can agree that the sky is blue, I cannot ascertain that your experience of its blueness is the same as mine.

这样，我们可以放心地说，仅仅因为系统(无论是机器人还是黑猩猩)以某种方式工作，并不能告诉我们它是否以您或我的方式有意识。 这使弹药有了意识，即意识是一个频谱，并最终成为关于主观体验的问题，而主观体验与主观性的存在有关。 在科学界，这种主观体验被恰当地标记为“ qualia”，这被定义为主观，有意识体验的个体实例。 Qualia是当我观察天空的蔚蓝时，或当您享受浆果的甜美时所拥有的个人经验。 尽管您和我可以同意天空是蓝色，但我无法确定您对天空的感受与我的相同。

图灵测试工具 (The Turing Test As a Tool)

The rise of conscious machines, or seemingly conscious machines, will undoubtedly have a lot of significance in helping us answer the mystery of consciousness. At the very least, the emergence of intelligent machines will cause a philosophical upheaval in which an increasing number of people will wonder about the hard problem of consciousness and therefore seek answers for it. In a future where machines exhibit human-like intelligence and consciousness, more people are bound to question the very nature of their own consciousness.

有意识的机器或看似有意识的机器的兴起无疑对帮助我们回答意识的奥秘具有重要意义。 至少，智能机器的出现将引起哲学上的动荡，越来越多的人会怀疑意识的艰苦问题，因此寻求答案。 在机器展现人类般的智力和意识的未来中，越来越多的人必定会质疑自己意识的本质。

The infamous Turing Test, now well known in any discussion about the evolution of AI, is a method of inquiry for determining whether or not a computer is capable of thinking like a human being. Many exquisite works of science fiction within our era have explored this concept, whether directly or indirectly. Most famously, in movies like “Her” and “Ex Machina”, the protagonists use tools to determine whether or not the machine that they are interacting with is having a conscious experience in the way that we are.

臭名昭著的图灵测试，现在在有关AI进化的任何讨论中都众所周知，它是一种查询方法，用于确定计算机是否能够像人类一样思考。 在我们这个时代，许多精美的科幻小说作品都直接或间接地探索了这一概念。 最著名的是，在诸如“她”和“前机械家”之类的电影中，主角们使用工具来确定他们与之互动的机器是否以我们的方式有意识地体验。

“Ex Machina” offers perhaps the most jarring depiction of this — in which a machine exhibits human-like qualities that one would undoubtedly mistake for consciousness, such as manipulation, acting in self-interest, and scheming. While watching Ex Machina, one can easily imagine what it is like to be the AI that we are witness to. In fact, an audience might even feel deep empathy toward the AI. Indeed, it is the rise of such self-interested artificial intelligence that the Musks of the world are afraid of, and it’s the rise of such machines that therefore invoke images of a robo-calypse.

“ Ex Machina”也许提供了最刺耳的描述-一台机器展现出类似于人的特质，人们无疑会误以为是意识，例如操纵，出于自利和策划。 观看Ex Machina时，您可以轻松想象成为我们见证的AI的感觉。 实际上，观众甚至可能会对AI产生深深的同情。 的确，世界马斯克人所惧怕的是这种自私的人工智能的兴起，而正是这种机器的兴起，因此它们唤起了机器人凯莉的形象。

How carefully we should deal with and prepare for the evolution of AI is a separate issue. But the hope is that in trying to figure out whether or not we can create general AI — in other words, create consciousness — we might come one step closer to figuring out the emergence of consciousness.

我们应该如何认真应对和为AI的发展做准备是一个单独的问题。 但是希望是，在试图弄清楚我们是否可以创建通用的AI(换句话说，创造意识)时，我们可能会更进一步地弄清意识的出现。

Ultimately, if a robot looks, talks, and walks like a human being, we can only be as certain of its consciousness as I am about yours.

最终，如果机器人像人一样看，说话，走路，我们对它的意识就只能像我对你的意识一样确定。

This is a good enough assessment: but in the process, we need to create more sophisticated versions of the Turing Test if we truly want to get to the heart of the debate: what in this universe causes the lights to switch on in some parts of it while they remain off in others?

这是一个足够好的评估：但是在此过程中，如果我们真的想引起争论的焦点，我们需要创建更复杂的图灵测试版本： 在这个宇宙中什么导致灯在某些地方点亮当他们留在别人身边时呢？

翻译自: https://medium.com/@tjajal/will-ai-help-us-solve-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness-7a9013f5e052

oracle 难题解决