Bet you can't produce any actual evidence of that (apart from the debate about it, which has been going for about 50 years. — Wayfarer
Self-driving cars, then planes, then IBM's Watson that's being used in medical sciences to analyze X-Ray's and fMRI's. — Posty McPostface
Here I would go off down the usual path of explaining how intelligence arises in nature as dissipative entropic organisation - an expression of the second law of thermodynamics. :) — apokrisis
But, none of them constitute or amount to 'a being'. — Wayfarer
Now of course, there are those who say they are: notably, Ray Kurzweil, who preaches the singularity, and others of his ilk. But those philosophers are materialists, meaning that their arguments are subject to the various arguments against materialism (which are too numerous and detailed to summarise here.) — Wayfarer
the physics of the human mind — Posty McPostface
But, I'm not sure you see the paradox in ascertaining the validity of metaphysical statements in a materialist world. — Posty McPostface
There's little to no evidence pointing that there are extraneous (metaphysical) factors at play when analyzing the mind (brain). — Posty McPostface
Leading scientists in integrating and visualizing the explosion of information about the brain will convene at a conference commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Human Brain Project (HBP). “A Decade of Neuroscience Informatics: Looking Ahead,” will be held April 26-27 at the William H. Natcher Conference Center on the NIH Campus in Bethesda, MD.
Through the HBP, federal agencies fund a system of web-based databases and research tools that help brain scientists share and integrate their raw, primary research data. At the conference, eminent neuroscientists and neuroinformatics specialists will recap the field’s achievements and forecast its future technological, scientific, and social challenges and opportunities.
“The explosion of data about the brain is overwhelming conventional ways of making sense of it," said Elias A. Zerhouni, M.D., Director of the National Institutes of Health. "Like the Human Genome Project, the Human Brain Project is building shared databases in standardized digital form, integrating information from the level of the gene to the level of behavior. These resources will ultimately help us better understand the connection between brain function and human health.”
The HBP is coordinated and sponsored by 15 federal organizations across four federal agencies: the National Institutes of Health (NIMH, NIDA, NINDS, NIDCD, NIA, NIBIB, NICHD, NLM, NCI, NHLBI, NIAAA, NIDCR), the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Department of Energy. Representatives from all of these organizations comprise the Federal Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Human Brain Project, which is coordinated by the NIMH. During the initial 10 years of this program 241 investigators have been funded for a total of approximately $100 million.
More than 65,000 neuroscientists publish their results each month in some 300 journals, with their output growing, in some cases, by orders of magnitude, explained Stephen Koslow, Ph.D., NIMH Associate Director for Neuroinformatics, who chairs the HBP Coordinating Committee.
“It’s virtually impossible for any individual researcher to maintain an integrated view of the brain and to relate his or her narrow findings to this whole cloth,” he said. “It’s no longer sufficient for neuroscientists to simply publish their findings piecemeal. We’re trying to make the most of advanced information technologies to weave their data into an understandable tapestry.”
Except for one point: when intelligence evolves (which is surely does) how come it discovers 'the law of the excluded middle'. That is not 'something that evolved'. — Wayfarer
Do you think it's gotten easier since then, or more complicated? I don't know for sure, but I bet the latter. — Wayfarer
Because I don't see what you say or have referenced as being proof that stuff like simulating the human brain as being impossible. — Posty McPostface
That sounds mystical — apokrisis
So, your argument is some sort of Zeno's paradox, as in we're not there thus we'll never get there? — Posty McPostface
Wouldn't it be much better informed and nonbiased to even eventually make moral statements and ethical postulates? — Posty McPostface
I don't think this is necessarily something that can be understood in terms of the 'entropification principle'. I prefer a teleological attitude - that we're something the Universe enjoys doing. — Wayfarer
The burden is really on you - as the AI proponent - to show that your machine architecture is actually beginning to simulate anything the human brain is doing. — apokrisis
As I see it the best or safest approach to what you propose would be to program a non-sentient AI to express human ideals, and to give it control over us, forcing us to live up to our own ideals. If it were sentient and too much like us it would be just as irrational as we are. — praxis
Has your claimed counterfactual - AI is simulating the essence of mindful action - come into sight yet? — apokrisis
The CTD-principle mentioned earlier in regards to Wayfarer. — Posty McPostface
Some philosophers, called rationalists, claim that we have a special, non-sensory capacity for understanding mathematical truths, a rational insight arising from pure thought. But, the rationalist’s claims appear incompatible with an understanding of human beings as physical creatures whose capacities for learning are exhausted by our physical bodies. 1
For David Deutsch, a young physicist of unusual originality, quantum theory contains our most fundamental knowledge of the physical world. Taken literally, it implies that there are many universes “parallel” to the one we see around us. This multiplicity of universes, according to Deutsch, turns out to be the key to achieving a new worldview, one which synthesizes the theories of evolution, computation, and knowledge with quantum physics. Considered jointly, these four strands of explanation reveal a unified fabric of reality that is both objective and comprehensible, the subject of this daring, challenging book. The Fabric of Reality explains and connects many topics at the leading edge of current research and thinking, such as quantum computers (which work by effectively collaborating with their counterparts in other universes), the physics of time travel, the comprehensibility of nature and the physical limits of virtual reality, the significance of human life, and the ultimate fate of the universe. Here, for scientist and layperson alike, for philosopher, science-fiction reader, biologist, and computer expert, is a startlingly complete and rational synthesis of disciplines, and a new, optimistic message about existence.
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.