“There is no security”—to quote his own words—“against the ultimate
development of mechanical consciousness, in the fact of machines
possessing little consciousness now. A mollusc has not much
consciousness. Reflect upon the extraordinary advance which machines
have made during the last few hundred years, and note how slowly the
animal and vegetable kingdoms are advancing. The more highly organised
machines are creatures not so much of yesterday, as of the last five
minutes, so to speak, in comparison with past time. Assume for the sake
of argument that conscious beings have existed for some twenty million
years: see what strides machines have made in the last thousand! May
not the world last twenty million years longer? If so, what will they
not in the end become? Is it not safer to nip the mischief in the bud
and to forbid them further progress?
“But who can say that the vapour engine has not a kind of
consciousness? Where does consciousness begin, and where end? Who can
draw the line? Who can draw any line? Is not everything interwoven with
everything? Is not machinery linked with animal life in an infinite
variety of ways? The shell of a hen’s egg is made of a delicate white
ware and is a machine as much as an egg-cup is: the shell is a device
for holding the egg, as much as the egg-cup for holding the shell: both
are phases of the same function; the hen makes the shell in her inside,
but it is pure pottery. She makes her nest outside of herself for
convenience’ sake, but the nest is not more of a machine than the
egg-shell is. A ‘machine’ is only a ‘device.’”
Then returning to consciousness, and endeavouring to detect its
earliest manifestations, the writer continued:-
“There is a kind of plant that eats organic food with its flowers: when
a fly settles upon the blossom, the petals close upon it and hold it
fast till the plant has absorbed the insect into its system; but they
will close on nothing but what is good to eat; of a drop of rain or a
piece of stick they will take no notice. Curious! that so unconscious a
thing should have such a keen eye to its own interest. If this is
unconsciousness, where is the use of consciousness?
“Shall we say that the plant does not know what it is doing merely
because it has no eyes, or ears, or brains? If we say that it acts
mechanically, and mechanically only, shall we not be forced to admit
that sundry other and apparently very deliberate actions are also
mechanical? If it seems to us that the plant kills and eats a fly
mechanically, may it not seem to the plant that a man must kill and eat
a sheep mechanically?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account