From: mk_thisisit
The question of how human consciousness is born is often posed [00:00:05], [00:00:11], [00:00:52]. While some search for a “soul” or specific locations for concepts like good and evil, the core inquiry revolves around how consciousness functions and its potential attribution to artificial intelligence [00:00:14], [00:00:18], [00:00:21].
The speaker believes consciousness appeared very early, possibly due to natural selection, and views understanding as a defining feature of conscious beings [00:01:09], [00:05:31], [00:06:29].
Understanding and Consciousness
The ability to understand is presented as a fundamental aspect of consciousness [00:05:08]. If an entity understands something, it implies awareness, and therefore, consciousness [00:05:17]. The quality of understanding has been a driving force for human development, leading to advancements such as complex traps for hunting [00:06:20], [00:06:23].
Understanding Beyond Humans
The speaker suggests that understanding is not exclusive to humans [00:07:37]. Examples include hunting dogs communicating complex ideas to coordinate deer hunts [00:07:01], [00:07:27], which required them to understand [00:07:33]. While human understanding is more sophisticated, consciousness is believed not to be reserved solely for human beings [00:17:34], [00:17:39]. Many dog owners, for instance, are convinced their dogs are conscious and can communicate non-verbally [00:17:44], [00:18:02], [00:18:07].
Even animals like orangutans are thought to have some form of verbal communication, and insects like honeybees can pass messages to each other without speech [00:18:33], [00:18:43], [00:18:51].
Consciousness and Computation
A core argument against AI achieving consciousness comparable to humans stems from the speaker’s work at Cambridge University, particularly involving Gödel’s theorem [00:01:14], [00:01:23], [00:01:59].
Gödel’s theorem states that within any consistent formal system capable of expressing basic arithmetic, there are true statements that cannot be proven within that system [00:02:01], [00:04:02]. The speaker argues that while a computer can follow rules (like 0s and 1s) [00:02:38], human mathematical understanding goes beyond mere computation [00:01:14], [00:02:21]. The ability to “know” that Gödel’s theorem is true comes from understanding why principles work, which transcends the mechanical application of principles [00:04:52], [00:04:55].
Limits of Artificial Intelligence
The speaker asserts that if human consciousness is not merely computation, then artificial intelligence with consciousness will never be created with current computers [00:10:21], [00:10:30], [00:10:32]. This directly contradicts predictions by figures like Elon Musk and OpenAI creators who foresee “strong artificial intelligence with its own consciousness” in the near future [00:11:23], [00:11:30], [00:11:35].
The speaker believes that while AI can “seem conscious” through simulation [00:11:53], it lacks true understanding and inherent desires [00:12:22], [00:12:26], [00:12:29]. The real danger lies in conscious human beings with bad intentions using these powerful machines, rather than the machines themselves taking control [00:12:49], [00:12:54].
The Role of Microtubules and Quantum Phenomena
The discussion touches upon recent observations suggesting that microtubules, common structures in living systems [00:13:37], might be involved in consciousness [00:14:56]. There are unconfirmed reports of microtubules being capable of quantum signaling, possibly through super-radiation [00:14:38], [00:14:58], [00:16:01]. While this could potentially relate to the emergence of consciousness in brains, the speaker cautions that this is a simplistic view, as microtubules are ubiquitous and not exclusive to humans [00:15:11], [00:15:17].
The speaker expresses concern about “crazy experiments” based on misunderstood or misattributed ideas regarding quantum physics and consciousness [00:16:21], [00:16:37].
Free Will and Consciousness
The concept of free will is explored in relation to quantum mechanics [00:19:12]. The idea, often associated with Stuart Hameroff, suggests that free will might stem from the non-deterministic collapse of the wave function in quantum mechanics [00:19:37], [00:19:54], [00:20:27], [00:20:56]. This collapse is a physical process not fully understood and doesn’t follow a deterministic equation [00:20:50], [00:20:58].
However, the speaker reframes free will not as a random quantum choice, but as a conscious decision [00:21:48], [00:21:54]. Free will, in this view, is the result of understanding why one choice is objectively “better” than another based on expected consequences [00:22:00], [00:22:04], [00:22:56]. It involves a conscious evaluation of the world’s workings to achieve a desired outcome, rather than a mere desire or a random selection [00:23:40], [00:23:50], [00:23:58]. Therefore, free will is seen as utilizing conscious choice to make a decision based on understanding [00:24:06], [00:24:42], [00:24:45].