Reference no: EM13863013
Keith Stanovich in his book focuses on the primary goal of discussing the possibility of humans being robots. This perception, on the other hand, is controversial given the provided reference to the concept of robots and the subsequent foundation of ideas that culminated in its rise. However, it is eminent to seek clarification on the contribution of consciousness on the entire claim. Moreover, numerous responses have been provided by knowledge in different people. Historically, there are suggestions that are pointed towards consciousness. However, Descartes take on consciousness is primarily dependent on the perception that "I think therefore I am". Besides being a simple statement, it has led to the formation of many thoughts on the primary principle of conscious. Among the controversies associated is the explicit depiction of conscious as a state of the mind. On the other hand, automation and intuition can be used to adequately evaluate the claim. Therefore, this essay assesses the selective approach to conscious in consideration of the perceptions of Keith Stanovich.
In all the circumstances that are brought forward by Descartes, conscious is achieved. However, individuals tend to lose conscious as they gain more experience. Consciousness is at times made as an additive to the applicable limitations when in particular situations. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that habituation with particular conditions limits the conscious of an individual. Stanovich, however, points out that the consciousness fo the human robots are still challenged by intuition (Stanovich, 36). Therefore, understanding intuition is essential for a complete understanding of consciousness.
The development of a notion or belief about a concept is primarily facilitated by intuition. Therefore, the greater sense of intuition translates to a reduced reflection of consciousness. Therefore, Stanovich presents a platform where the role of intuition in human robots can be easily accessed. This is facilitated by the detailed revelation of the particular concepts that lead to the perceptions of human robots. However, he clearly indicates the lack of the humans to appreciate the preliminary facts found about their perceptions (Stanovich, 25). Apparently, the limitations associated with intuition hinder the aspect of reality portrayed by the author.
Challenges experienced by Stanovich can be closely linked to the quale associated with the robots. Humanity has believed over the years that the robots are a product of science fiction. Moreover, humans are highly dependent on computerized models that are rarely existent in their normal mode of operation. Science fiction, on the other hand, has shown the human robots are objects with computer chipsets that can manipulate the normal body function desirable top levels and specifications. The said chipsets influence the decision-making the capacity of the brain. The argument by Stanovich, in this case, is, therefore, difficult to comprehend if an individual is paying respect to the realization of human robots through the genetic perception (Stanovich, 13). Therefore, the quale linked with humans is evidence for the limitation of consciousness. Moreover, the allegations point towards the suggestion that robotic humans are associated with the zombie perception.
On the other hand, zombie attitude implies that individuals do not consider conscious in the decision-making process. The suggestion by Stanovich, on the other hand, allows for the visualization of stubbornness to a model of zombie behavior. Therefore, the concept of consciousness is considered to be a light in the supplementary process. Therefore, their input should be regarded as a part of the wisdom that is about the rest of the suggestions. Therefore, according to the perception, free will is achieved. To allow for absolute conviction on changes, an explanation of the genetic make-up and meme theories are considered by Stanovich. Therefore, the enhancement of free will promotes consciousness (Stanovich, 70). Moreover, the availability of the supposed state of consciousness is best deliberated alongside the limitation of the mind.
In conclusion, the concept of knowledge may not be readily taken in by the humans. Considerably, it is relatively difficult to understand an element of the notion of consciousness as shown in an individual's immediate environment. There are limitations thereof which allow for the difficulty ion the realization of the sense of impairment about consciousness. Therefore, there is a difficulty presented in comprehending the arguments by Stanovich. However, the effects of such cases are inconsiderable in the evaluation of the failures of the author's perspective. Visibly, the realization of the human robots is a product of the consciousness of the involved persons. Furthermore, broad knowledge of the concept of the robots addresses the implications presented by the perception. Expression of limitations in the human population is a great element of the knowledge of consciousness as discussed by Keith.