The % of philosophers of mind actually prepared to have this discussion is in the single digits. But y'all would rather have metaphysics debates from the 17th century.https://twitter.com/deontologistics/status/1194592758540967937 …
-
Show this thread
-
eripsa Retweeted eripsa
Philosophers have been actively poisoning the well of this conversation.https://twitter.com/eripsa/status/1183737314943606784 …
eripsa added,
eripsa @eripsaReplying to @eripsa @evansd66 and 2 othersMy first clue that Floridi's work is not what it seems was his extremely bad article in Aeon in 2016, where he claims without argument that the Curry-Howard correspondence proves that machines will never be conscious. https://aeon.co/essays/true-ai-is-both-logically-possible-and-utterly-implausible … pic.twitter.com/s0qO0LZJPH1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
The chances of getting a Cartesian to care about HoTT are approximately zero.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 likeShow this thread -
Replying to @eripsa
Almost everyone involved in the history of developing the Curry-Howard correspondence & its varieties have more nuanced opinions about mysterianism/Cartesianism than you. It's not that they aren't aware of a "math is ontology" platform. But exactly Zero of them think it's sober.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There are at least 20 working philosophers of mathematics who have contributed directly to computing and mathematics who are also formalists and also more on the mysterian/Cartesian side. Just because u don't understand Floridi's argument — "he dumb".
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @euanthes
Can you link me to something developing a connection between Curry-Howard and Cartesianism? I'm extremely skeptical. The passage I quote from Floridi is a clear nonsequitur.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eripsa
Frankish probably won't take the time to read this, but he might benefit greatly too. (I doubt
@keithfrankish read The Origins of Geometry (Husserl) I recc'd which isn't a contemporary short-cut pdf but actually delves into this issue far deeper.) http://tiny.cc/cnscnssTime3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I might, you never know :) I have views, but I don't want to be dogmatic about them
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I think that you may be a bit too pussyfooted when you make your points. While it is virtuous to avoid overstating one's position, you should also not understate the degree of your certainty. If an argument is more tenable than another, we owe it to present it as strong as it is.
-
-
I can't win, can I? :)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
You cannot win while you are still worried to get rejected by people you know to be caught up in an illusion :)
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like - 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.