为什么任何事物都具有意识？
Why Is Anything Conscious?
AI总结：
本文提出通过自然选择和具身有机体解释意识问题，认为意识源于信息处理的主观性，且效价优先于中性表示。
摘要：
我们通过自然选择和具身的有机体作为起点来解决意识问题。我们提供了一种形式化描述，说明生物系统如人类身体如何根据效价自我组织，以分层解释未标记的感官信息。系统在不同空间和时间尺度上被吸引和排斥。这是一种对未标记物理状态的定性解释。我们展示了这种解释如何暗示行为政策，这些政策仅通过信息处理的这一定性方面而不同。自然选择倾向于那些积极干预世界以实现稳态和繁殖目标的系统。颇具挑衅性地说，死亡定义了意义。这意味着在活系统中，信息处理本质上是主观的，即其质量嵌入其核心。定性信息处理涉及内感受和外感受分类器，并决定了自我生存的优先事项。我们提出因果心理物理学原理作为定理，并证明一般最优学习迫使这种效价优先本体。定性的好或坏处理必然在质量中性属性的表示之前（即“红色”由效价构造）。在像复杂捕食这样的选择压力下，这会产生一个自我层次结构，其中再反馈和反思自我意识是其结果。我们基于现象意识与访问意识的初步区别讨论了这一点。我们声称，没有访问意识的现象意识可能很常见，但反向则不可信。我们的提议为意识的正式科学奠定了基础，比僵尸幻想更接近人类事实。
英文摘要：
We tackle the problem of consciousness by taking the naturally selected, embodied organism as our starting point. We provide a formalism describing how biological systems such as human bodies self-organize to hierarchically interpret unlabelled sensory information according to valence. The system is attracted and repelled at different spatial and temporal scales. This is a qualitative interpretation of an unlabelled physical state. We show how such interpretations imply behavioural policies which are differentiated from each other only by this qualitative aspect of information processing. Natural selection favours systems that actively intervene in the world to achieve homeostatic and reproductive goals. Put provocatively, death grounds meaning. This means that in living systems information processing is necessarily subjective, that is, it has quality embedded into its very core. Qualitative information processing involves interoceptive and exteroceptive classifiers, and determines priorities for self-survival. We formulate The Psychophysical Principle of Causality as a theorem, and prove generalisation optimal learning forces this valence first ontology. Qualitative good or bad processing necessarily comes \textit{before} quality neutral representations of properties (i.e. ``red'' is constructed from valence). Under selection pressures like sophisticated predation this produces a hierarchy of selves, of which reafference and reflective self awareness are a consequence. We discuss this in light of the seminal distinction between phenomenal and access consciousness. We claim that phenomenal consciousness without access is likely common, but the reverse is implausible. Our proposal lays the foundation of a formal science of consciousness, closer to human fact than zombie fiction.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
