Robot consciousness: philosophical and scientific perspectives

¶ … robots can have consciousness and whether or not that robot can report on its environmental surroundings and how those environmental surroundings affect the robot. Autonomous robots do currently exist and are robots that can perform specific tasks without human guidance or aid in any environment, structured or unstructured. This type of robot is highly desirable in fields such as space exploration, waste water treatment and general everyday tasks, such as lawn maintenance and cleaning. A fully autonomous robot would have the ability to gain much-needed information about the surrounding environment, work for an extended period of time without human guidance, and move some or part of itself throughout the operating environment without human assistance. Such a robot would be able to avoid situations, which may be potentially harmful to humans, property or to the robot itself. This type of robot may eventually be able to adjust itself to better complete tasks, much like a human would. The robot would be using a robotic brain, of sorts, which could be developed without human intervention. A complete autonomous robot would be able to sense its inner maintenance and would know where its charging station was located and how and when to get to the charging station. The robot would have sensory capabilities, such as touch, smell and sound. Outdoor rovers, such as the Mars Rover can find the position of the sun and can navigate their own route of destination, because they compute the safest routes and the most optimal route to the desired destination.

Artificial Consciousness

A lot of information has been compiled in books, case studies and on the Internet surrounding the concept of what is referred to as artificial consciousness. The main question is whether or not a mechanical device could ever duplicate human intelligence. The second biggest question for many is whether or not this would be acceptable to us as humans. The final question that philosophers throughout the ages have asked is if a machine or mechanical device was able to successfully duplicate human intelligence, would we, as humans, be snuffing out the very core that created the intelligence in an almost murderous-type of vengeance, if we dismantled the machine. In short, would we be killing the machine?

This question has been posed to experts in artificial intelligence many times throughout the years and they usually give one of two answers. The first answer, and probably the most common answer, is that artificial intelligence will never truly happen. The second answer is that it will happen and to be prepared for it. In today's world, the average computer doesn't even have the intelligence of the average four-year-old child, so in many philosophers' eyes, the idea that any robot would develop artificial intelligence seems pretty farfetched. Computers can easily memorize concrete information and data, but the capability of making sense of this information or using any type of common sense to organize or develop further information is beyond their capability. For now, most computers can only work from information that has been entered into their system internally. Even a robot that has the capability of mapping out the safest or quickest travel destination is working from information that a human has put into the system previously at some point in time. That being said, until a robot or computer has the capability of adding to its information on its own (or learning and developing without the aid of human interference), the idea of artificial intelligence is fictional.

David Chalmers writes in his paper ("How Can We Construct a Science of Consciousness?") that it has become possible to think that we are moving toward a genuine scientific understanding of conscious experience. In the paper, Chalmers compares both third-person data and first-person data and talks about how both need some sort of explanation. Based on this paper and others I've read by Chalmers, I believe he would be in support of robotic consciousness to a certain extent. Chalmers often remains subjective in his findings and in the information he presents.

Australian Philosopher David Armstrong, however, strongly defends the identity of mental events and argues the objective of reality in relation to scientific realism. Artificial intelligence is aimed at building a machine or a robot that is capable of performing a variety of human-like functions, as well as personal growth and development, much like a human. This would be accomplished without the aid of human intervention or interference, so the robot, in essence, would be an entity all its own once it was built. It would know who its "master" was, but it would have the intelligence to repair itself or know where to seek repair when needed. Humans would have very little interference with such a robot.

Both philosophers make excellent points and have collected an abundance of information supporting various points surrounding related theories, however, the main argument is that artificial intelligence is still at a complete minimum and is far off from developing into an science where a robot could essentially think for itself and grow, mimicking a human being.