On Roger Penrose's Chess/Consciousness Paradigm

Roger Penrose wrote a book with the premise that human minds are grounded in the quantum realm. Hence human thought has an element of quantum computing to it implicitly. Thus one gets to what Roderick Chisholm might have called the problem of the criterion. As the quantum realm and quantum effects such as super-positioning transcend the material, steady state entanglement of atoms in the Universe at a deeper level, that is as in some ways it can be regarded as more 'real' or better as noumenal realm of being in-itself, one must just accept things on faith that this contingent reality is good.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/03/14/can-solve-chess-problem-holds-key-human-consciousness/

Probably it isn't presently possible to design a computer or even a quantum computer entirely in the quantum realm as if it evolved and had an essential, primary function from-the-ground-up. Instead quantum computers will be designed from the contingent reality of this Universe (top down) to interact or compute a little in the instantaneous quantum realm. That is an essential difference between human consciousness if it has a quantum, innate element and quantum computers.

I watched a video of the physicist Roger Penrose named: 'The Emperor's New Mind, Quantum Mind, Quantum Consciousness, The Laws of Physics' at Youtube. In the video he relates the reasons why he thinks a computer cannot be given an actual mind with lines of programmatic logic. Essentially he thinks that the cyto-skeleton, or the infrastructure that make up the brain neurons and synapses functions at the quantum level (with all of the issues of quantum super-positioning, quantum uncertainty and so forth) and thus cannot be modeled in programmatic logic.

Of course it might be possible to design an automatic operating quantum computer one day with its own brand of artificial intelligence with real-world integration able to randomly reconfigure material reality according to its own inscrutable will without any sort of moral reservations-yet I think that wouldn't be a very good idea. That would be something like designing an robotic arsonist with its own will to set as a security guard in a fireworks factory. At any rate it would take quite a long time for the clever writers of computer code and physical designers of quantum computers to evolve that sort of technology... a century or two at least. So it isn't much of a clear and present danger.