ChatGPT GPT-4とおしゃべり 〜自分の意識は何？〜

脳科学について調べていたら、脳の構造、特に新皮質の構造が思っていたよりも複雑でなく、かなり単純な構造をしているという事実を知り、自分とはなにか迷い込んだのでGPT君といろいろ相談してみた。

全然専門的な用語が使えず、たどたどしい言葉での説明となっていたが、うまく汲み取って言語化してくれて大変助かった。

周りの人達がAIじゃないかというような幻覚があるんだというのをAIに相談しているのが最高に皮肉なのかもしれない。

※例によって英語。読めない人はページ翻訳の機能を使ってみてね。

Thanks. Could you explain me the emotion which other people, things and environments are completely fake and artificial, only me is actual human beings, lest of humans are AI or imaginary things. That feelings, how would you describe?

The emotion you are describing is known as solipsism, which is the philosophical belief that only one's own mind is certain to exist. In this view, other people, things, and environments are considered to be mere constructs or illusions. Solipsism arises from extreme skepticism and the idea that the only thing one can truly know is the existence of one's own mind or consciousness. In this context, a person experiencing solipsistic feelings may feel like they are the only "real" human being, while everything else around them is artificial or a product of their imagination.

Thanks. To recognize the actual world, I get information from eyes and ears and etc…. However, these information is not directly into my brain. they change into electronic signals. Which means, I could be a only brain, someone sends electronic signals to my brain. Like a matrix movie. If I am in such a situation, how could I realize I am in a fake world?

The thought experiment you're describing is similar to what philosopher René Descartes called the "Evil Demon" hypothesis or the "Brain in a vat" scenario. In these hypothetical situations, it's challenging to determine if you're experiencing a simulated or fake reality, as all the information your brain receives is indistinguishable from the real world.

However, there isn't a foolproof method to determine if you're in a fake world or not. Philosophers and scientists have debated this question for centuries. Some argue that our understanding of reality is always limited to our perception, and thus, there's no guaranteed way to know for sure.

In the movie The Matrix, the characters used specific signs, such as déjà vu or glitches, to identify the simulated nature of their reality. However, in the real world, we don't have such clear indicators.

Some philosophers argue that the best we can do is rely on the principle of parsimony or Occam's razor, which states that we should favor the simplest explanation that requires the fewest assumptions. In this case, the most straightforward explanation would be that our experiences are based on an actual, shared reality rather than a complex, simulated one.

Nonetheless, the question of whether our reality is genuine or simulated remains an open philosophical debate, with no definitive answer.

I see. Imagine we are in a situation world, and we are AI but the god who created this world and us didn’t tell us that we are AI and this world is only a simulation world. However we are freedom, we can access same cultural and technological levels as nowadays. How could we identified this world is actual or simulated world by science approach?

From a scientific perspective, determining whether the world is real or simulated is difficult, as the nature of a well-designed simulation would be indistinguishable from reality. However, scientists and philosophers have proposed various approaches to test or identify signs of a simulated reality:

1. Identifying inconsistencies or glitches: If our world were a simulation, it might have inconsistencies, glitches, or other signs that it is artificial. By examining the physical laws and principles governing our universe, we could potentially discover irregularities that could suggest a simulated environment.

2. Observing computational limitations: If our universe is simulated, it would likely run on some form of computational substrate. This could impose limitations on the resolution of space, time, and energy. Physicists might search for evidence of these limitations, such as the Planck length, which is the smallest possible length in the universe, or the holographic principle, which suggests that the information content of a region of space can be limited by the area of its boundary.

3. Discovering a "message" from the creator: In a simulated world, the creator might have left some form of "signature" or message embedded in the fabric of reality. Finding such a message would be strong evidence for a simulated world.

However, even if we were to find evidence suggesting a simulated reality, it may still be difficult to conclusively prove that our world is not real. Our understanding of reality is ultimately based on our perceptions and experiences, which are inherently limited.

In conclusion, while science may offer some avenues for investigating the possibility of a simulated reality, proving or disproving the hypothesis remains a challenge, and the question of our reality's nature continues to be a topic of philosophical debate.

Okay thanks. Overinflated computational limitations is very interesting prospect. In the actual world, the light travels very fast. However, if I travel as fast as the light travels, still I can see the light travels. I think it is Relativity theory or something? That theory is like a computational limitations.

Yes, you're referring to the Theory of Relativity, developed by Albert Einstein. It includes two key ideas: the Special Theory of Relativity and the General Theory of Relativity. The Special Theory of Relativity, which deals with objects moving at constant speeds, particularly near the speed of light, explains the phenomenon you mentioned.

According to the Special Theory of Relativity, time slows down for objects moving at speeds close to the speed of light. This is known as time dilation. Consequently, if you were traveling at near-light speed, you would still observe light moving away from you at the speed of light, even though you're traveling at a comparable velocity.

In this context, time dilation and other relativistic effects could be considered as constraints on how objects behave in the universe, especially when they reach extremely high speeds. However, these constraints stem from the fundamental nature of space and time, as described by the Theory of Relativity, rather than being evidence of computational limitations in a simulated reality.

While it's fascinating to think about how the laws of physics might relate to the idea of a simulated world, there's no direct evidence linking relativistic effects to computational limitations in a potential simulation. The Theory of Relativity is a well-established scientific framework that describes how our universe operates, regardless of whether it's a simulation or not.

Okay, how about brain activity. Still we didn’t fully explain how our brain works. Could be some another dimensions existence control my brain as a playable character. Of cause we have no clue because it is as it designed.

Our understanding of the brain and its functions is still growing, and there is much to learn about its intricacies. However, there is no scientific evidence to suggest that our brains are controlled by beings from another dimension or that we are "playable characters" in some grand design.

The idea of beings from another dimension controlling our brains is speculative and rooted in the realm of science fiction, rather than being based on empirical evidence. Current neuroscience research is focused on understanding the brain's structure, the nature of neural connections, and how different brain regions interact to produce thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

While it's always possible that new discoveries could reshape our understanding of the brain and consciousness, the idea of other-dimensional beings controlling our brains remains a speculative concept without any basis in the current scientific understanding of the brain or reality.

I see. It is more philosophical thing but why I am I, not someone else. If I, my brain works by just a chemical reactions, what is my consciousness. It is very difficult to describe. More the science unveiling the brain, less justified my existence is special,

The question of personal identity and consciousness has been a subject of debate and inquiry for centuries, spanning the fields of philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience. It is indeed difficult to describe and understand why you are you and not someone else, as it involves the subjective experience of being a conscious individual.

Consciousness is often referred to as the subjective experience of the mind and the world. It is the feeling of having a unique perspective, sensations, thoughts, and emotions. While the brain does function through chemical reactions and electrical impulses, consciousness and self-awareness are still not entirely understood. There are various theories and ideas surrounding the nature of consciousness, but a consensus has not been reached.

As science continues to explore the brain, the nature of consciousness, and the reasons behind our unique individuality, it is crucial to remember that the complexity of our existence cannot be reduced to mere chemical reactions. Our experiences, emotions, and thoughts contribute to making us who we are, and it is the ongoing interplay between our biology, psychology, and environment that shapes our sense of self.

While it might be challenging to justify why your existence is special, it's essential to acknowledge the richness and depth of human experience and recognize that each person's perspective is unique and valuable. The quest for understanding consciousness and our personal identity is a fascinating and complex journey that continues to captivate the minds of philosophers, scientists, and curious individuals alike.