> In this case, these stem cells are coaxed to grow into blobs of brain tissue, without anything resembling thoughts, emotions, or consciousness.
Sure, I'm skeptical that organoids are anywhere near being capable of thought or emotion, but I don't see how it's acceptable that TFA can just assert so as fact with no further elaboration. Are the organoids developed enough to produce connections between neurons and show electrical activity by the stage they develop eye-like structures? If there's nothing like that, cool, no problem. However, if they do have that level of development, how exactly do you prove they have no subjective experience?
How does one prove that the silicon chip in your computer has no subjective experience? How does one prove another human being has a subjective experience? Until someone figures out how consciousness arises from physical processes, we have no way of knowing whether consciousness has or has not arisen from any given physical process.
I would presume the actual scientists involved either (a) know that these blobs of cells are as incapable of subjective experience as my appendix or else (b) know there is no scientific basis for claiming one way or the other, though they may well share my belief that it is unlikely.
Now, I would be quite pleased if science journalism would do away with making such claims in either direction without further elaboration.
Just a bit of fun :D
“As you once did for the vacuous Rom, grant us eyes, grant us eyes. Plant eyes on our brains, to cleanse our beastly idiocy.”
- Micolash, Bloodborne
10 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 35.0 ms ] threadSure, I'm skeptical that organoids are anywhere near being capable of thought or emotion, but I don't see how it's acceptable that TFA can just assert so as fact with no further elaboration. Are the organoids developed enough to produce connections between neurons and show electrical activity by the stage they develop eye-like structures? If there's nothing like that, cool, no problem. However, if they do have that level of development, how exactly do you prove they have no subjective experience?
Now, I would be quite pleased if science journalism would do away with making such claims in either direction without further elaboration.