Joscha Bach is a German cognitive scientist, AI researcher, and philosopher known for his work on cognitive architectures, artificial intelligence, mental representation, emotion, social modeling, multi-agent systems, and the philosophy of mind.
Is consciousness even a scientific (i.e., objective) phenomenon? Obviously no. The correlates of consciousness, based on first person reports (or functional MRI scans), are certainly worthy of investigation, but that is not quite the same thing.
In any case, human consciousness is by all accounts exceedingly complex. Why not start with trying to understand the most primitive forms of subjective experience that we presumably share with most if not all of the animal kingdon, namely, pleasure and pain.
We might start by asking whether pleasure and pain are separate and independent phenomena, as we usually think of them, or whether they are correlative, like the two sides of a coin, in which case there might be a symmetry between them such that they just balance out over the lifetime of every sentient creature.
By way of analogy, think of a spring, the stretching of which is experienced as pain, the relaxation of which is experienced as pleasure.
The best book on how intelligence might have evolved from primitive sentient creatures I know of is Max Bennet's "A Brief History of Intelligence." All that is required for a starting point is a creature that a) can move, b) can remember, and c) can distinguish (feel) pleasure and pain in the sense that it seeks to avoid pain and experience pleasure. From there through a process of Darwinian evolution you can imagine (or at least I can) something as complex as human consciousness gradually emerging—with human emotions for example (which are, at least in my opinion, the most fundamental ingredients of complex human consciousness) being highly modified forms of pleasure and pain.
One corollary of Bennet's thesis, I think, is that for computers to become truly conscious they must be able to actually experience pleasure and pain. Of course I may be wrong about this.
On your recommendation I looked at this book. It's actually quite long and so far I'm not as impressed as I thought I would be based on your review. Perhaps you can recommend a few specific sections I should look at?
Otherwise my neural net will have to reduce certain weights related to the "Luke Lea" vector ;-)
Keep in mind that I am, if anything, an economist at heart, and a very specialized one at that, so have spent very little time thinking about these issues. I'm also 83 years old with all that implies (!) so I want be surprised if you down weight my vector. :)
I like that you often start with your guest's early life. Here, it's particularly interesting that Bach describes his childhood in the forest, in the "Garden of Eden" his father created with the goal of "producing art... interacting with his inner voices, with the things that motivated him" and then later on, about himself, he says, "what I would like to see is an augmentation of our minds," using AI to enhance our own imagination. To me, these seem like similar aims, and I wonder if Bach would agree, and if he views the potential AI-augmentation approach as better than his father's method, or easier, or just different.
I agree with your guest that a major goal of education should be "to understand the canon of our society" and I share the dismay that this isn't a widely accepted goal anymore. I think you, me, and your guest are of similar ages, and it was at least somewhat the case that there were books that "everyone" should have read as part of a standard education -- in the US 1984, Huckleberry Finn, a few of Shakespeare's plays, ... . There was probably more of a canon a generation before that, and less of one now. Only a small fraction of things I was assigned to read in high school are assigned in my kids' high school; the overall amount and level of reading is less, also. This definitely affects students' ability to think about society and the world. (I wonder if anyone tabulates, at a national scale, high school required readings?)
Bach's self-education reminds me of a note I made when listening to your previous episode (#75, Adventures in Physics, etc.). You mentioned that there was resistance from the school system to accelerating you to more advanced courses, and implied (if I remember correctly) that it's better now. I was surprised to hear this -- I think in contrast it's worse now in most schools! There's a real aversion to acceleration, advanced courses, etc.
Moving on to the overall mood of society, I'm not sure I agree that it's as pessimistic as Bach believes, but I'm not sure about this. I think the pessimism displayed on social media may be greater than in "real life." I admit, though, I have trouble assessing this, maybe since many of the arguments for pessimism are so poor. (I find it surprisingly easy, in my Energy and the Environment class, to explain why despair isn't necessary.) These questions of optimism/pessimism or of having grand goals for society reminded me of a short, interesting book I recently read, "Bitter Lemons of Cyprus" (Lawrence Durrell, 1953) in which the author recounts his years in Cyprus at the tail end of British rule. It gives a sense of the Empire fading because it lacked the will to continue; that may be a good outcome overall, but it's an interesting mechanism for a civilization changing course. (A bit more about that and other books here: https://eighteenthelephant.com/2024/12/31/the-year-in-books-2024/)
Speaking of which: Please convey to your guest that yes, he should write a book!
I remember about 15 years ago there were often a few kids at a time from S. Eugene HS taking advanced math/physics courses at UO. But we may have regressed since then!
MSU has dual-enrollment with several high schools in the area, I think. My son (won't mention his name here) and several of his classmates took MSU math/phys classes while in HS.
Eugene HS students can still take classes at UO, thankfully -- my older son did this for 2 years, finishing real analysis, etc. (Scheduling was a challenge -- he'd dash over from Sheldon by bike.) If one is accelerated one year ahead in math, it's possible to take 1 year of math at UO. However, even compared to 10 years ago, students are *discouraged* from moving ahead in math, sometimes even if the student, parents, and grade-level teacher are supportive.
In my first term teaching, I had a high school student in the class; he got the highest score (and is a physicist now). I didn't know he was in high school until I asked at the end of the term what the strange notation on the class list meant!
Is consciousness even a scientific (i.e., objective) phenomenon? Obviously no. The correlates of consciousness, based on first person reports (or functional MRI scans), are certainly worthy of investigation, but that is not quite the same thing.
In any case, human consciousness is by all accounts exceedingly complex. Why not start with trying to understand the most primitive forms of subjective experience that we presumably share with most if not all of the animal kingdon, namely, pleasure and pain.
We might start by asking whether pleasure and pain are separate and independent phenomena, as we usually think of them, or whether they are correlative, like the two sides of a coin, in which case there might be a symmetry between them such that they just balance out over the lifetime of every sentient creature.
By way of analogy, think of a spring, the stretching of which is experienced as pain, the relaxation of which is experienced as pleasure.
The best book on how intelligence might have evolved from primitive sentient creatures I know of is Max Bennet's "A Brief History of Intelligence." All that is required for a starting point is a creature that a) can move, b) can remember, and c) can distinguish (feel) pleasure and pain in the sense that it seeks to avoid pain and experience pleasure. From there through a process of Darwinian evolution you can imagine (or at least I can) something as complex as human consciousness gradually emerging—with human emotions for example (which are, at least in my opinion, the most fundamental ingredients of complex human consciousness) being highly modified forms of pleasure and pain.
But to see how this might happen (along with the emergence of non-emotional qualia, by the way, which are child's play in comparison) you first have to read Bennet's amazingly simple little book. Here is a link: https://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Intelligence-Humans-Breakthroughs/dp/0063286343
One corollary of Bennet's thesis, I think, is that for computers to become truly conscious they must be able to actually experience pleasure and pain. Of course I may be wrong about this.
On your recommendation I looked at this book. It's actually quite long and so far I'm not as impressed as I thought I would be based on your review. Perhaps you can recommend a few specific sections I should look at?
Otherwise my neural net will have to reduce certain weights related to the "Luke Lea" vector ;-)
I would start with breakthrough #1.
Keep in mind that I am, if anything, an economist at heart, and a very specialized one at that, so have spent very little time thinking about these issues. I'm also 83 years old with all that implies (!) so I want be surprised if you down weight my vector. :)
Fascinating interview -- very dense!
I like that you often start with your guest's early life. Here, it's particularly interesting that Bach describes his childhood in the forest, in the "Garden of Eden" his father created with the goal of "producing art... interacting with his inner voices, with the things that motivated him" and then later on, about himself, he says, "what I would like to see is an augmentation of our minds," using AI to enhance our own imagination. To me, these seem like similar aims, and I wonder if Bach would agree, and if he views the potential AI-augmentation approach as better than his father's method, or easier, or just different.
I agree with your guest that a major goal of education should be "to understand the canon of our society" and I share the dismay that this isn't a widely accepted goal anymore. I think you, me, and your guest are of similar ages, and it was at least somewhat the case that there were books that "everyone" should have read as part of a standard education -- in the US 1984, Huckleberry Finn, a few of Shakespeare's plays, ... . There was probably more of a canon a generation before that, and less of one now. Only a small fraction of things I was assigned to read in high school are assigned in my kids' high school; the overall amount and level of reading is less, also. This definitely affects students' ability to think about society and the world. (I wonder if anyone tabulates, at a national scale, high school required readings?)
Bach's self-education reminds me of a note I made when listening to your previous episode (#75, Adventures in Physics, etc.). You mentioned that there was resistance from the school system to accelerating you to more advanced courses, and implied (if I remember correctly) that it's better now. I was surprised to hear this -- I think in contrast it's worse now in most schools! There's a real aversion to acceleration, advanced courses, etc.
Moving on to the overall mood of society, I'm not sure I agree that it's as pessimistic as Bach believes, but I'm not sure about this. I think the pessimism displayed on social media may be greater than in "real life." I admit, though, I have trouble assessing this, maybe since many of the arguments for pessimism are so poor. (I find it surprisingly easy, in my Energy and the Environment class, to explain why despair isn't necessary.) These questions of optimism/pessimism or of having grand goals for society reminded me of a short, interesting book I recently read, "Bitter Lemons of Cyprus" (Lawrence Durrell, 1953) in which the author recounts his years in Cyprus at the tail end of British rule. It gives a sense of the Empire fading because it lacked the will to continue; that may be a good outcome overall, but it's an interesting mechanism for a civilization changing course. (A bit more about that and other books here: https://eighteenthelephant.com/2024/12/31/the-year-in-books-2024/)
Speaking of which: Please convey to your guest that yes, he should write a book!
Re: acceleration, you may be right!
I remember about 15 years ago there were often a few kids at a time from S. Eugene HS taking advanced math/physics courses at UO. But we may have regressed since then!
MSU has dual-enrollment with several high schools in the area, I think. My son (won't mention his name here) and several of his classmates took MSU math/phys classes while in HS.
Eugene HS students can still take classes at UO, thankfully -- my older son did this for 2 years, finishing real analysis, etc. (Scheduling was a challenge -- he'd dash over from Sheldon by bike.) If one is accelerated one year ahead in math, it's possible to take 1 year of math at UO. However, even compared to 10 years ago, students are *discouraged* from moving ahead in math, sometimes even if the student, parents, and grade-level teacher are supportive.
In my first term teaching, I had a high school student in the class; he got the highest score (and is a physicist now). I didn't know he was in high school until I asked at the end of the term what the strange notation on the class list meant!