| ▲ | hackinthebochs 3 days ago | |||||||
That's a fair reading but not what I was going for. I'm trying to argue for the irrelevance of causal scope when it comes to determining realness for consciousness. We are right to privilege non-virtual existence when it comes to things whose essential nature is to interact with our physical selves. But since no other consciousness directly physically interacts with ours, it being "real" (as in physically grounded in a compatible causal scope) is not an essential part of its existence. Determining what is real by judging causal scope is generally successful but it misleads in the case of consciousness. | ||||||||
| ▲ | hnfong 2 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
I don't think causal scope is what makes a virtual candle virtual. If I make a button that lights the candle, and another button that puts it off, and I press those buttons, then the virtual candle is causally connected to our physical reality world. But obviously the candle is still considered virtual. Maybe a candle is not as illustrative, but let's say we're talking about a very realistic and immersive MMORPG. We directly do stuff in the game, and with the right VR hardware it might even feel real, but we call it a virtual reality anyway. Why? And if there's an AI NPC, we say that the NPC's body is virtual -- but when we talk about the AI's intelligence (which at this point is the only AI we know about -- simulated intelligence in computers) why do we not automatically think of this intelligence as virtual in the same way as a virtual candle or a virtual NPC's body? | ||||||||
| ||||||||