Discussion of Whether Robots Can Be Conscious

We use robots every day. From our laptop to our vacuum, robots are consistently around us. But have you ever wondered if a robot could be more than just an technological machine, could they be conscious? A robot is a programmable, self-controlled device consisting of electronic, electrical, or mechanical units. Consciousness is described as being aware of and responding to one's surroundings. The link between technology and consciousness relies on the question ‘is consciousness a material property?’ If the theory of physicalism is correct, consciousness is physical property. Therefore, if consciousness is a physical property then robots could be conscious as physical material can be replicated/produced. However, if consciousness is not a material property, then we cannot produce it, resulting in non-conscious robots.

Substance dualism is a theory that suggests that the mental and the physical are separate substances with independent existence. Rene Descartes, a French philosopher, defended the argument of Substance Dualism by using the ‘mind body problem’. The mind–body problem is an problem concerning the relationship between thought and consciousness in the human mind, and the brain as part of the physical body. The mind-body problems ask a number of questions, such as: ‘Are the mind and body are separate What is the mind and body’s relationship to each other? What is consciousness? And how can consciousness arise out of ordinary matter?’ These questions that remain unanswered challenge the argument that robots could be conscious as they suggest that this property we call ‘consciousness’ is not a physical property. Therefore, if the mind is immaterial, it cannot be replicated through a material thing.

The theory of substance dualism is challenged by the doctrine of Interactionism. Interactionism is a dualist position in the philosophy of mind which argues that the mind and body are separate, however there is causal interaction between the two. Descartes questioned how an immaterial entity, the mind, with no extension in the physical world can cause changes in a physical body, and how can a physical body cause changes, moods or feelings in a non-physical mind? If the mind and body were indeed two separate substances, as the theory of substance dualism states, this interaction would not occur.

In contrast to substance dualism, physicalism is the doctrine that everything which exists is no more extensive than its physical properties. Phineas Gage was living proof that physicalism could possibly be true. Phineas Gage was a railway worker in the mid-19th century who suffered a severe brain injury when an explosion drove an iron spike through his brain. He survived the injury, but his personality changed considerably. In this example, Gage’s mind, consciousness and behaviour is shown to be affected by the physical change. If the mind wasn’t physical, Gage’s personality after the injury would have been just as much ‘him’ as his personality before the injury. So, if the consciousness from Gage’s head, your consciousness and every other person’s consciousness is physical and could be replicated, robots could be conscious too.

Although the example of Phineas Gage is a convincing argument for the theory of physicalism, the theory is still questioned with the example of ‘Mary’s room’. This famous thought experiment first discussed by Frank Jackson, is a story about a girl named Mary who lives her life in a black and white only room. Mary has never seen colour before, however, she knows every single physical fact about colour and colour perception. One day, Mary exits the room and experiences, for the very first time, direct colour perception. She sees the colour red for the very first time, and learns something new about it — namely, what red looks like. If physicalism is true, Mary ought to have gained total knowledge about colour perception by examining the physical world. Although Mary knew all the physical facts about colour vision, experiencing colour still taught her something new. This demonstrates that mental states, like colour perception, can't be completely described by physical facts. If you aren’t convinced from what I’ve discussed, you can hear it from the proposer of the experiment, Frank Jackson. Jackson states, “It seems just obvious that she will learn something about the world and our visual experience of it. But then is it inescapable that her previous knowledge was incomplete. But she had all the physical information. Ergo there is more to have than that, and Physicalism is false.”

The question of ‘could robots be conscious’ depends on the confirmation of the theory Physicalism or Substance Dualism. Both theories have their flaws, leaving us to question the likely hood of if robots could and will ever be conscious. For robots to be conscious, consciousness would have to be a material property, which would support the theory of physicalism. If consciousness is to be discovered a material property and physicalism was proven true, our vacuum, laptops and all other robots around us could be conscious. However, the theory has not been confirmed, nor has Substance dualism, leaving me without an answer to the question, ‘could robots be conscious’. In the words of Rene Descartes, “The only thing I know, is that I know nothing”.