Advertisement

Minds and Machines

, Volume 15, Issue 3–4, pp 415–444 | Cite as

Consciousness, Agents and the Knowledge Game

  • Luciano Floridi
Article

Abstract

This paper has three goals. The first is to introduce the “knowledge game”, a new, simple and yet powerful tool for analysing some intriguing philosophical questions. The second is to apply the knowledge game as an informative test to discriminate between conscious (human) and conscious-less agents (zombies and robots), depending on which version of the game they can win. And the third is to use a version of the knowledge game to provide an answer to Dretske’s question “how do you know you are not a zombie?”.

Keywords

artificial agents consciousness inferentialism knowledge game “muddy children” theorem “the three wise men” theorem zombies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I discussed several drafts of this paper at many meetings. It was the topic of a series of lectures on the philosophy of information at the University of Lisbon and I am grateful to Olga Pombo for that opportunity. A shorter version was then given as the Alan Turing Lecture in Computing and Philosophy at the European Computing and Philosophy Conference ECAP 2003 (University of Glasgow) and I wish to thank Susan Stuart for the invitation. A further revised version was then the topic of an invited lecture to the Oxford Society for Artificial Intelligence, of a graduate seminar in the history and philosophy of science organised by the Philosophy Department of the University of Bari, and of a graduate Seminario di Logica e Filosofia Analitica organised by Daniele Giaretta at the Philosophy Department of Padua University, and to whom I owe a most fruitful discussion. I am grateful to the participants in these meetings for their helpful discussions. In particular, I would like to acknowledge the help, useful comments and criticisms by Andrea Bianchi, Selmer Bringsjord, Massimiliano Carrara, Daniele Giaretta, Gian Maria Greco, Patrick Grim, Uriah Kriegel, Paul Oldfield, Gianluca Paronitti, Claudio Pizzi, Jeff Sanders, Susan Stuart and Matteo Turilli. Fabrizio Floridi provided the specific example of the three fezzes. Kia Nobre read the final version of this paper and made me aware of several crucial implications. If there are still obvious mistakes after so much feedback, I am the only person that should be embarrassed by them.

References

  1. Allen, C. (2003), Animal Consciousness, in Edward N. Zalta, ed., ‘The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’ Google Scholar
  2. Alston W. (1971) Varieties of Privileged Access. American Philosophical Quarterly 8: 223–241Google Scholar
  3. Alston W. (1986) Epistemic Circularity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47: 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barklund J. (1995) Metaprogramming in Logic. In: Kent A., Williams J.G. (eds) Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology. Marcel Dekker, New York, vol. 33 pp. 205–227Google Scholar
  5. Barwise J. (1988) The Situation in Logic. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  6. Barwise J. and Etchemendy J. (1987) The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity. Oxford University Press, New York; OxfordzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Barwise J., Seligman J. (1997) Information Flow: The Logic of Distributed Systems. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Block N. (1995) On a Confusion About a Function of Consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18: 227–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brazier F.M.T. and Treur J. (1999) Compositional Modelling of Reflective Agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 50: 407–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brazier, F.M.T., Treur, J., Wijngaards, N.J.E., and Willems, M. (1995), ‘Formal Specification of Hierarchically (De)Composed Tasks’, in Proceedings of the 9th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-based Systems workshop, KAW’95, Calgary, edited by B.R. Gaines and M.A. Musen (SRDG Publications, Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary), 25/21–25/20Google Scholar
  11. Bringsjord S. (1997) Consciousness by the Lights of Logic and Commonsense. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20: 144–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bringsjord S. (1999) The Zombie Attack on the Computational Conception of Mind. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59(1): 41–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conway J.H. and Guy R.K. (1996) The Book of Numbers. Copernicus, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Costantini, S. (2002), Meta-Reasoning: A Survey, in A.C. Kakas and F. Sadri, eds., ‘Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond - Essays in Honour of Robert A. Kowalski’, Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  15. Ditmarsch, H.P.v. (2000), Knowledge Games (Amsterdam). University of Groningen, Doctoral thesis in Computer Science, available online at http://www.ai.rug.nl/∼ ∼hans/Google Scholar
  16. Dretske F.(2003). How Do You Know You Are Not a Zombie?. In: Gertler B. (eds) Privileged Access and First-Person Authority. Ashgate, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. Elmer J. (1995) Blinded Me with Science: Motifs of Observation and Temporality in Lacan and Luhmann. Cultural Critique 30: 101–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fagin R., Halpern J.Y., Moses Y., and Vardi M.Y. (1995) Reasoning About Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass; LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Floridi L. (1996) Scepticism and the Foundation of Epistemology: A Study in the Metalogical Fallacies. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  20. Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2004a), The Method of Abstraction, in M. Negrotti, ed., ‘Yearbook of the Artificial. Nature, Culture and Technology. Models in Contemporary Sciences’, Bern: Peter Lang, Available online at http://www.wolfson.ox.ac.uk/∼ ∼floridi/pdf/loa.psGoogle Scholar
  21. Floridi, L. and Sanders, J.W. (2004b), ‘On the Morality of Artificial Agents’, Minds and Machines, 14(3), 349–379. Preprint available at http://www.wolfson.ox.ac.uk/∼ ∼floridi/Google Scholar
  22. Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M. (1994), Questions, in Van Benthem and Ter Meulen, eds., ‘Handbook of Logic and Language’, North-Holland: Elsevier ScienceGoogle Scholar
  23. Groenendijk, J.A.G., Janssen, T.M.V. and Stokhof, M.J.B. (eds) (1984), `Truth, Interpretation, and Information: Selected Papers from the Third Amsterdam Colloquium', Foris Publications, Dordrecht, Holland; Cinnaminson, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. Kriegel U. (2003) Consciousness as Sensory Quality and as Implicit Self-Awareness. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 2(1): 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kriegel U. (2004) Consciousness and Self-Consciousness. The Monist 87: 185–209Google Scholar
  26. Lacan, J. (1988), ‘Logical Time and the Assertion of Anticipated Certainty’, Newsletter of the Freudian Field, 2, 4–22. Originally written in March 1945, this was first published in Écrits, pp. 197–213, 1966Google Scholar
  27. Langevelde, I.A.v., Philipsen, A.W. and Treur, J. (1992), ‘Formal Specification of Compositional Architectures’, in B. Neumann, ed., Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on AI, ECAI-92, (John Wiley & Sons), 272–276Google Scholar
  28. Leibniz, G.W. (1995), Monadology, in G.H.R. Parkinson, ed., ‘Philosophical Writings’, (London: Dent; first published in Everyman’s Library in 1934; published, with revisions in Everyman’s University Library in 1973), 179–194Google Scholar
  29. Lycan, W.G. (2003), Dretske’s Ways of Introspecting, in B. Gertler, ed., ‘Privileged Access and First-Person Authority’, Burlington: AshgateGoogle Scholar
  30. McCarthy, J. (1971–1987), ‘Formalization of Two Puzzles Involving Knowledge’, Manuscript available online at http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/puzzles.html, first published in McCarthy 1990Google Scholar
  31. McCarthy J. (1990) Formalizing Common Sense: Papers by John McCarthy. Ablex, Norwood, NJGoogle Scholar
  32. Moody T.C. (1994) Conversations with Zombies. Journal of Consciousness Studies 1(2):196–200MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. Nagel T. (1974) What Is It Like to Be a Bat?. Philosophical Review 83(4): 435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rao A., Georgeff M. (1991) Modeling Rational Agents within a BDI-Architecture. In: Allen J., Fikes R., Sandewall E. (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, pp. 473–484Google Scholar
  35. Searle J.R. (1992) The Rediscovery of the Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass; LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Shimojo S., Ichikawa S. (1989) Intuitive Reasoning About Probability: Theoretical and Experimental Analyses of the “Problem of Three Prisoners”. Cognition 32: 1–24CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Symposium (1995), ‘Symposium on “Conversations with Zombies”’, Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(4)Google Scholar
  38. Turing A.M. (1950) Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind 59(236): 433–460CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. Walton D.N. (1991) Critical Faults and Fallacies of Questioning. Journal of Pragmatics 15: 337–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Werning, M. forthcoming, Self-Awareness and Imagination, in J. Saagua, ed., ‘Mind and ActionGoogle Scholar
  41. Wittgenstein, L. (1921/1961), Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung, in W. Ostwald, ed., ‘Annalen der Naturphilosophie, 14 (1921); Translated from the German by D.F. Pears and B.F. McGuinness, with the introduction by Bertrand Russell’, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961)Google Scholar
  42. Wooldridge M.J. (2002) An Introduction to Multiagent Systems J. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computing Laboratory, Department of Philosophy and IEGOxford UniversityOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations