I dont go along with writers like Nagel who want to establish some sort of self-identical ‘I’ that accompanies every perception and infuses it with some sort of special feeling of me-ness. — Joshs
We can't say that computing is the same as thinking. — L'éléphant
We can't say that computing is the same as thinking. — L'éléphant
Until then, let's stick to reality.No, but I think AI will be a different kind of thinking and not merely computing. — Jackson
You can't talk about evolution without the biology. That's what evolution explains -- the biological changes in humans.At any rate, I still hold these questions to not be answerable via biological evolution per se. — javra
It means, as we speak, AI remains to be a computer. Until someone had created a human with human minds, let's keep this discussion within the reality of what we have available. — L'éléphant
You can't talk about evolution without the biology. — L'éléphant
I'm linking a thread here where there are articles linked to support biological changes leading to intelligence of humans.I do not think we know what human intelligence is. — Jackson
I'm linking a thread here where there are articles linked to support biological changes leading to intelligence of humans. — L'éléphant
Is ontological definition the same as determinism? Can a non-deterministic world be defined in the way you describe? — Joshs
the mathematics (structure) of quantum mechanics, or of the quantum-mechanical world, is reducible to well-defined pure sets, just as all mathematics is. — litewave
That's what we're trying to answer. Because humans evolved from animalistic awareness to intelligent humans. For example, homo sapiens?If the argument is that the occurrence of life explains the occurrence of consciousness ... I'll be parting from the debate. My intuitive gut belief is that life and consciousness are correlated. But I can't provide you with a proof of this. — javra
Continental Philosophy in the 20th and 21st centuries has set its sights on critiquing traditional notions
of identity. — Joshs
Common to Wittgenstein , phenomenology and various postmodern strands of thought is a re-thinking of the relation between identity and difference. Difference is not added onto , as the interactive behavior of, defined objects, but the precondition of identity. — Joshs
difference between objects means that they have different identities. In general, every two objects have some different properties and some same properties and thus there is a particular difference (or similarity) relation between the two objects. — litewave
And yet those fields and processes have a mathematical description and all mathematical descriptions are reducible to pure sets. — litewave
"The hard problem" is a pseudo-problem due to assuming an unwarranted confusion / conflation of an ontological duality with semantic duality compounded subsequently by observing that polar opposite terms "subjectivity" and "objectivity" cannot be described in terms of one another, which amounts to framing the "problem" based on a category mistake. There isn't an "hard problem" to begin with, schop.How does one actually get the point across why this ["evolution"] is not an acceptable answer as far asthe hard problemis concerned? — schopenhauer1
Saying "evolution" (empirical model) doesn't even address the alleged philosophical issue at hand (conceptual incoherence).Can this ["evolution"] be seen as answering it, or is it just inadvertently answering an easier problem? If so, how to explain how it isn't quite getting atthe hard problem?
"The hard problem" is a pseudo-problem due to assuming an unwarranted confusion / conflation of an ontological duality with semantic duality compounded subsequently by observing that polar opposite terms "subjectivity" and "objectivity" cannot be described in terms of one another, which amounts to framing the "problem" based on a category mistake. There isn't an "hard problem" to begin with, schop. — 180 Proof
Nothing I've written claims or implies that "animals (are) non-sentient machines". — 180 Proof
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.