Individual Sentients Beware! - New Study Shows Zombies Are in most!

Preliminary results from the new progressive Test for Sentience indicates strongly that zombie defense are in almost all in most human populations. Early results from tests conducted on a random sample of my local population shows that individuals can be generally categorized in to two groups: Homo sentiens and Homo sapiens (that's zombies! ).Cognitive authorities have often wondered how you could check for sentient subjectivity in a sensible process. How could one differentiate a zombie from the actual person? A brand new Sentience Quotient Test has been made. No! No! Not that Turing examination bull. The entry will need to come from the horse's mouth.TEST QUESTION: Imagine an interaction at 'arms length' having a process you realize is definitely an android but is indistinguishable from a person in most visible behavioral characteristics. Besides the fact of material metabolism, how could you start conceptualizing your difference( s), as a person, from this kind of machine? Give reaction to you at any desired length. Infinite time is allowed.RESPONDENT: NO DIFFERENCESTEST RESULT: Established. Respondent can be a philosophical zombie.RESPONDENT: I've A SUBJECTIVE. INTRINSIC LIFE THAT MACHINE CANNOT REPRODUCE BLAH BLAH BLAH....TEST RESULT: Non-philosophical zombie suspected although not confirmed.I made a decision to try the examination on my friends. The principle is simple. The way where the zombie sofas his words in reaction to the Sentience Quotient Test may suggest to me what it has got inside it. Now, this will be an interesting project: to prove that still another individual person is just a device simulation of me. That must certanly be quite interesting discovery; that outward appearances are deceptive.That a number of the people I have been dealing with in my own neighborhood are not actual persons, at least, not in the sense in which I've always understood the phrase 'individual.' How amazing! That I've been fooled all my life, thinking that others are like me, having a non-structured, thought process transcending, wholly intuitional situation of natural self-aware consciousness; and that's been so just because of the clever system of masking defenses of outward biological appearances that have been elaborated to replicate the outward appearances of my inner being. It follows that I might actually be alone in an Universe of bio-robots. Excellent! Unbelievable!This specially-designed test appears to have verified by long standing suspicions that I are now living in some sort of populated mainly by zombies. Fairly Mary next door was the first to ever simply take the Sentience Quotient Test. It's possible to determine from the vigilantly designed test issue whether an intelligent system is just a actual person or even a zombie system.The fundamental idea to the test can be as follows: A non-sentient intelligent system (a machine system) tends to associate 'mind' with the capabilities of its 'executive' plans (its machine homunculi). A machine system appears, therefore, to reject the proposition that a sentient system will provide it with: that 'consciousness' is transcendent of most information processing functions.A machine system will struggle to understand the thought that, in a sentient system, consciousness is the buyer of the end-products of information processing in the specific non-structured format obscurely called 'qualia.'The opinion that sentient experience is the emergent merchandise of interaction between a non-machine homunculus and information in the non-structured 'qualia' format is intuitively understood by a sentient system but remains a contentious issue with the machine head theorist who 'says' or 'talks about' inner representations of 'fact' by 'government' system homunculi which represent its 'machine consciousness.'The distinction between a machine and a sentient (non-machine) system rests on the very fact that no machine system can handle information in 'qualia' format. You will need a non-machine 'government' to 'read' information in 'qualia' structure (where 'qualia' is the specific qualitative house which supervenes on raw information to an enriching effect on knowledge to get a sentient system ).Machine systems and their makers face the insurmountable problem of how to produce 'authentic' representations of 'fact' offered the 'part less than full' restriction of the collection system of reasoning on which machine awareness runs. The alternative 'qualia' format of sentient systems disposes of the 'part less than whole' concern elegantly; for, in the 'qualia' method, the non-set reason principle of 'part identical to whole' guarantees that there is no asymmetry of reality and inner mental representation of reality.Machine mind may aid in our conceptualization of mind function but it'd be a mistake to think that a sentient being is a machine.It is, certainly, in principle, possible to design an excellent simulation of a sentient system only as the ineffable, absolute condition of being appears only to itself and to no other; outward bio-appearances being only the finger pointing to the fame within.Given that the non-structured subjective aspect to mind may be observed only by itself, it becomes possible to design a non-subjective system that is indistinguishable in type and function from a subjective system.How could one check for sentience in a system offering with an outward appearance of complete subjectivity?Assuming one were to develop a robot simulation of himself; a robot indistinguishable in appearance and function from its creator. What inward big difference could there be between you and such simulacrum of you? Medical practitioner Robert could not tell!When anyone presents his opinion on the subject of sentience, he unavoidably reveals himself; his private inner experience. You can infer, thus, whether a sensible system is just a zombie machine or even a sentient system by way of a thorough investigation of its efforts around the subject.Yes! Robert failed my 'Turing' check for sentient subjectivity; and therefore, I am sure, would Wittgenstein, Hume, Descartes, the behaviorist Skinner and variety of other modern brain advocates I'd rather maybe not mention by name.But these are only an idea of the truly amazing iceberg. There's a battle of zombies hidden inside our midst.If ever Robert had experienced being the way that I do, he then might have answered my test question at the fall of a hat. He would have been able to state a wholly non-structured, intuitional, non-thought, non-process, wholly Other, numinous component to his program, which sees methods purpose from a separate and aloof vantage point and is understood intuitively while the important ontological ground of the qualities and quantities of sentient experience.Mysterium tremedum et fascinans.