That's no way to achieve clarity is it? "The Mars Rover "kind of" emulates human thought". — Daemon
To me, the term 'new science,' can be often be portrayed, by some, as in some way 'superior,' to 'old science. I simply defend against that. — universeness
Is modern physics superior to Newtonian physics? — Joshs
Are scientists smarter now than they were then? I don't like your use of 'superior.'Do they subsume and transcend their older versions — Joshs
that the new is superior to the old to the extent that it subsumes and enriches the old, giving us the option to choose from among a variety of ways of thinking ( including the old) that the older approach could not? — Joshs
One thing I didn't consider: without thoughts, we still have bodily feelings, and emotions. — hypericin
Unless I am dissociated, this pain is my pain, and I am frightened.
He is terrified, but is unable to mentally formulate his situation in any way.
Then, his migraine fades away, replaced by an all encompassing numbness. Yet even numbness is a feeling, what he feels is nothing. His terror is replaced by a corresponding emotional blankness. He sees bright lights passing above him. He hears the doctors comment on his condition, but can't seem to understand. He smells the antiseptic odor of hospital, and tastes copper in his mouth. That is all. No thoughts, no feelings, no sense of the body. Can you empathize? Is this being strictly speaking still sentient?
My question would be whether there's any reason why improved algorithms, more compute, and more/better data won't eventually result in machines being as good as humans at translation? — jas0n
No, in my opinion, such are not superior as they are a consequence of — universeness
A car can always be faster and have more functionality and more efficiency than an earlier model but that does not necessarily make it 'superior,' as I'm sure classic and vintage car enthusiasts will attest to. — universeness
Another line of thought might be, in your opinion, is the capitalist free market economy 'superior' to the Epicurean commune? — universeness
Shouldn’t it be the case that they are superior precisely because they are a consequence of ? Isn’t that the whole point and value of advancement in understanding , that you take with you but build upon the old knowledge? The latin root of superior is ‘above’. There cannot be an above without a below, a foundation, a ground. The above is consequent on the below — Joshs
The new know-how is superior to the old know—how in that one’s newer knowledge gives one the option of building a replica of the older model but the earlier era of technology in which the older model did not have the option of building the newer model. — Joshs
An interesting case in point. Art has always been and will always be in the eye of the beholder so I don't see how you can ever use the word 'superior' in relation to art. I am personally not a fan of modern art, at all, no matter what new technique, not available to the old masters, is employed.The newer era is superior — Joshs
I want to be clear that what I’m saying isn’t that newer painting or cars aren’t necessarily aesthetically superior or prettier than the older versions, but that the newer ways of understanding art or car technology are superior to the older because they stand on the shoulders of the old ways and provide more. choices. — Joshs
so they did not have the option of choosing a modern free market system , whereas we moderns, being the consequence of older thinking like Epicureanism, have the requisite knowledge to choose to set up an Epicurean commune if we want — Joshs
If you take away thoughts, what is left of the self? Is there anything?
By thoughts I mean self talk, visualizations, and any other perceptual modality you use to think.
Without thoughts, is there self awareness? Without self awareness, is there awareness? — hypericin
A designed entity that can rival humans at translation will likely be along the lines of a ‘wet-wear’ creature that we interact with rather than ‘program’. — Joshs
Do you know that, personally?
Are you able to have bodily feelings or emotions without also having some thoughts along with them? — baker
To feel fear, one must already have certain beliefs about the workings of the world and the meaning of life. — baker
I stipulate that he has lost the ability to think: to self talk, and to visualize.How do you know?
Is it because he merely can't speak or write, due to the stroke, or is he truly mentally disabled? — baker
If one measures oneself the way a not particularly compassionate external observer might judge one, then the result is going to be truly meagre. — baker
I am interested in the nature of self, and of sentience in general. Is the self fundamentally composed of all the sensations it feels, internal and external? Or is there something more?What one considers to be an acceptable reply to these questions depends on one's intention for asking them — baker
I agree that interaction will probably be primary. 'Wet' may not matter. Why should moisture matter? My money is on stuff-independent structure. — jas0n
It cannot be ‘stuff-independent. — Joshs
I'm thinking we might figure out how to build interactive/social 'minds.'we are remaining within the computationalist representationaliat model — Joshs
A designed entity that can rival humans at translation will likely be along the lines of a ‘wet-wear’ creature that we interact with rather than ‘program’.
— Joshs
I agree that interaction will probably be primary. 'Wet' may not matter. Why should moisture matter? My money is on stuff-independent structure. — jas0n
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.