If you just want to talk about what understanding in general is, I'm totally with TheMadFool here. Understanding is mapping. Complex chains of association between sensations and representations. — Hermeticus
I've argued that it's absolutely possible for an AI to have the same experiences we have with our senses — Hermeticus
In science fiction? — Daemon
But computers don't have sensations, they don't make associations, they don't use representations. — Daemon
If we're not talking about hypotheticals then the answer is obviously no, AI can not understand like humans do. — Hermeticus
We already have this.The physical principles behind these sensors and the senses of our body are literally the same. — Hermeticus
We don't have this yet, hence I raised the point of artificial brain.The difference is in the signal that is sent thereafteand how the signal is processed. — Hermeticus
If we were to talk in hypotheticals: — Hermeticus
Sensation
The physical principles behind these sensors and the senses of our body are literally the same. — Hermeticus
We already have this. — Hermeticus
And as for representations - computers are literally built on it. They're a representational system. Everything you see on your browser is a representation of a programming language. The programming language is a representation of another programming language (machine code). Machine code is a representation of bit manipulation. Bits are a representation of electric current. — Hermeticus
Understanding is mapping — Hermeticus
Thank you! — TheMadFool
I.e. performative competences developed by lived-experience (of failure and adaptation).Understanding denotes conceptual reflection (i.e. metacognition) by which knowing is distinguished from, and contextualized by, not knowing. — 180 Proof
A. The councilors refused to allow the protestors to demonstrate, because they advocated violence.
B. The councilors refused to allow the protestors to demonstrate, because they feared violence. — Daemon
Mapping is not understanding, as illustrated by my examples. — Daemon
Ok so, what's your definition of understanding?
Please don't repeat yourself by saying, "...as illustrated by my examples...". — TheMadFool
But why not? As Wittgenstein famously observed "meaning is use". You can tell what I mean by "understanding" by the way I use it in my examples. I'm using it in the standard way. I could of course provide you with dictionary definitions of "understand", but it hardly seems necessary as you already know how the word is normally used. If you didn't already understand the word, you wouldn't understand the definition. — Daemon
If you want a dictionary definition, Google it. I'm using the word in the standard way. — Daemon
Understand: perceive the intended meaning of (words, a language, or a speaker). — Daemon
A. The councillors refused to allow the protestors to demonstrate, because they advocated violence.
B. The councillors refused to allow the protestors to demonstrate, because they feared violence. — Daemon
Here’s a better example: “The chicken is ready to eat” — I like sushi
The point is that it is on the writer to avoid ambiguity in sentences when needed. — I like sushi
"The store has bananas" might be translated by the CAT tool from another language; perhaps it's translating to French, and it would map "banana" to "banane". That's a mapping of symbols to symbols.The CAT tool suggests translations based on what I have already translated. — Daemon
I guess you wrote these sentences because you seem to be offended because myself, and another above, have pointed out they are poorly written. — I like sushi
What TMF is talking about is a mapping from "banana" to the stuff on the store shelf, the stuff infused within banana bread, the stuff in banana cream pies. — InPitzotl
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.