Mechanist philosophy failed to explain the mind for centuries because it saw causality as movement. https://edge.org/response-detail/26733 …
-
-
Replying to @umruehren
@umruehren@Plinz In your pan-computational view, is an old steam train not a 100 GB computer with brass and grease?1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @blubberquark
@blubberquark I am not a pan-computationalist. And steam trains are not exactly general computers@umruehren1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
@Plinz@umruehren po-tay-to, to-mah-to ... guess that joke didn't land2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @blubberquark
@Plinz@umruehren seriously though, the point on mechanical intuition is harder to grasp if you can code and use a comp. mental model1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @blubberquark
.
@blubberquark I found that philosophers tend to imagine Turing Machines as mechanical, and thus different from Lambda Calculus1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@blubberquark I suspect the halting problem only matters on the unbounded case
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.