Do you think that AI will ever feel emotions?

[Write4U]

Nobody said one word about magic, or circumventing mathematical and physical laws or any of that nonsense. You dragged that in, just like you dragged in the birds and bees and squirrels. I have no idea why you did that, as it was all irrelevant,

Not really. I cited insects as being a very successful non-emotional bio-organism as compared to humans having demonstrable emotions. Where does the difference occur?

We - some of us - were talking about mechanical vs organic arrangement of materials to achieve similar functions. If you want to talk about every other damn thing under the sun, have at it!
So - what ever: you have the podium.

If you are visualizing some mechanical "arrangement" producing the ability to feel emotion, you are on the wrong path, IMO.

I introduced insects and more advanced species as an evolutionary ladder toward the ability to experience emotions in living organisms. Lets look at the differences between insects and humans to see what humans have which allows us to experience emotion. Once we know how "emotion" is generated in biological organisms, we can look at ways to build this into AI.

AFAIK, there is no machine which displays true emotional (chemical) responses. Look at mechanical arrangements in machines all you want. That's not where you are going to find the secret of emotion.

Before you can artificially imitate life functions, you better understand what it is and how it functions in organisms which DO posses these life functions.

We cannot magically invent our way out of these physically reactive biological functions. We need nature to teach us!!!!!

 

[Write4U]

Jeeves said,
So? That means natural intelligence has a common origin.

W4U said,
No, that means the common denominator of everything is mathematical or quasi-intelligent in essence.

After looking at this again from a different perspective. Yes, life has a common origin, therefore emotion has a common origin and a common purpose.

We better start looking at stuff that has a common origin to see where in the evolutionary stage emotional experiences become advantageous to survival, don't you think?

 

[Jeeves]

If you are visualizing some mechanical "arrangement" producing the ability to feel emotion, you are on the wrong path, IMO.

I got that the first time you stated it.

 

[Write4U]

I got that the first time you stated it.

Do you believe it was a valid observation?

 

[Write4U]

I take an expert's observation seriously. Anil Seth put this in very simple terms;
"you don't need to be intelligent to feel emotion, but you probably do have to be alive"

That's one meaningful vote for studying living things to find out about emotions.

Less meaningful is my concurrence........

 

[billvon]

I don't disagree, I merely posit that nothing man can do is unnatural and as such must comply with natural laws. No magical shortcuts.

The definition of "artificial" is "made or produced by human beings rather than occurring naturally." It is the opposite of natural.

 

[billvon]

A bird's nest is an artificial construct. A spider's web is an artificial construct. Get it?

Sounds like you don't get it. Those things are not artificial.

 

[Jeeves]

Do you believe it was a valid observation?

Yes. I also said, at the very beginning, that I'm inclined to agree ---
but have no logical or scientific basis for that gut feeling.
As it turned out, neither did you, but you led me a merry chase all around the mulberry bushes of what-all has worked in nature in the past, rather than demonstrate any valid reason why something different can't work in the future.

"you don't need to be intelligent to feel emotion, but you probably do have to be alive"

Nor does he. We're all just guessing.

 

[Write4U]

The definition of "artificial" is "made or produced by human beings rather than occurring naturally." It is the opposite of natural.

I understand the difference. My position is that no matter what humans can design it has to obey natural laws.

Hence, nothing magical......

 

[Write4U]

Sounds like you don't get it. Those things are not artificial.

You mean that "artificial" only applies to humans?

The Oldest Stone Tools Yet Discovered Are Unearthed in Kenya
3.3 million-year-old artifacts predate the human genus

Would you say this is an artifact or a natural object?

Approximately 3.3 million years ago someone began chipping away at a rock by the side of a river. Eventually, this chipping formed the rock into a tool used, perhaps, to prepare meat or crack nuts. And this technological feat occurred before humans even showed up on the evolutionary scene.

“This discovery challenges the idea that the main characters that make us human—making stone tools, eating more meat, maybe using language—all evolved at once in a punctuated way, near the origins of the genus Homo,” says Jason Lewis, a paleoanthropologist at Rutgers University and co-author of the study.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/oldest-known-stone-tools-unearthed-kenya-180955341/[/quote]

A nest is a fabricated artifact, a web is a fabricated artifact, a house is a fabricated artifact.
A termite hill is a fabricated artifact which is meticulously maintained by its inhabitants.
Honey combs are artifacts, manufactured for a very specific purpose.

Natura Artis Magistra!

 

[Jeeves]

Insistence as proof.

 

[Write4U]

Insistence as proof.

I provided proof of an artifact which was not made by a human but a precursor, 3.3 million years ago.

I know the term artifact pertains to human constructs and often identify jewelry or illustrations. But that does not mean humans are the only species that use or fashion "tools" for their convenience.

So we're dealing with semantics more than anything. There are animals which use tools and trinkets for specific purposes, therefore these tools are that animal's artifacts.

artifact, noun,
object, such as a tool, that was made in the past: The museum has artifacts dating back to prehistoric times.

THE TOOLS ANIMALS USE

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/03/animal-tools/

and watch the theft of valuables by rival males.

Notice how older adults will ruin the early attempts by young birds.

And this Master builder....

I would give this builder a degree in architecture.

 

[spidergoat]

Not really. I cited insects as being a very successful non-emotional bio-organism as compared to humans having demonstrable emotions.

It's my understanding that emotions are the most primitive form of thought. It's possible insects feel nothing but emotion.

 

[wegs]

It would be kind of cool to see “me,” but an AI version of me. My emotions at times, have caused me to make bad decisions. What would an emotion-less AI version of me be like?

Or would it be me at all? Do our emotions define us more than we think?

 

[Write4U]

It's my understanding that emotions are the most primitive form of thought. It's possible insects feel nothing but emotion.

Interesting! Is a brain even required to feel emotion?

Charles Darwin once wrote in his book The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals that insects “express anger, terror, jealousy and love.” That was in 1872. Now, nearly 150 years later, researchers have discovered more evidence that Darwin might have been onto something. Bumblebees seem to have a “positive emotionlike state,” according to a study published this week in Science. In other words, they may experience something akin to happiness. To some, the idea is still controversial, however.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/i-ll-bee-there-for-you-do-insects-feel-emotions/

By jove, you may be right. It seems entirely plausible that emotions are the most primitive form of chemical autoresponse activity.

I have seen some angry bees in my life. Nothing to trifle with. Don't poke their hive, not smart......

 

[Jeeves]

I provided proof of an artifact which was not made by a human but a precursor, 3.3 million years ago.

Which has nothing to do with artificial intelligence.

But that does not mean humans are the only species that use or fashion "tools" for their convenience.

Which has nothing to do with artificial intelligence.

There are animals which use tools and trinkets for specific purposes, therefore these tools are that animal's artifacts.

Which has nothing to do with artificial intelligence.
I'm perfectly well aware that other intelligences besides the human one build things and use tools.
Yes, those things are artificial. And they remain irrelevant.
The fact that all the life-forms on this planet have a common origin and developed similar ways of coping with their envornments has no bearing on the subject of the thread.
Yes, the way evolution happened on Earth did produce awareness, emotion and reason.

That does not mean that it's the only possible path to awareness, emotion and reason.

 

[Jeeves]

It would be kind of cool to see “me,” but an AI version of me. My emotions at times, have caused me to make bad decisions. What would an emotion-less AI version of me be like?

Or would it be me at all? Do our emotions define us more than we think?

I don't think you can replicate a specific human being (or dolphin or horse). Personality is too complex for that: even your biological clone would be different, no matter how closely its environment resembled yours. Emotions are something we generate - a kind of byproduct of mental activity, the way heat is a byproduct of physical activity. They're ephemeral, insubstantial, temporary conditions. But having had a feeling, like having had a thought, leaves us slightly - imperceptibly - changed, just as having walked from the bedroom to the kitchen leaves us imperceptibly changed. What defines are the cumulative effects of these tiny actions and reactions.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

squirrels

leave the squirrels out of it

the birds and bees

 

[RainbowSingularity]

oxygen breathing land mammals.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

What would an emotion-less AI version of me be like?

completely predictable based on environmental controls
you would become a machine
a biological machine that simply reacted in ways determined by direct stimulation or environmental or rates of decay(entropic cell aging & dietary processing cycles)

Do our emotions define us more than we think?

yes & no
yes to many
no to others
being the victim to ones emotions by choice
Verses being victim to others emotions ...

in fact it is a highly complex subject.