I conceive of the body as hardware and the mind as software and I fully acknowledge the limitations of that paradigm. People used to think the brain was micro-clockwork because that was the cutting edge of computronium back in the day
-
Show this thread
-
The era of aviation arose, not by dissecting birds but by making conceptual leaps to understand fluid dynamics and the mechanics of flight. Similarly if we ever build mind machines it will be through conceptual leaps in the science of intelligence
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
We are at least two scientific revolutions away from understanding the mysteries of consciousness and intelligence. Maybe those revolutions will never come. Maybe we're fundamentally incapable of producing the empirical lens that will grant us those insights
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
I think machine learning can teach us a lot about ourselves. Neural networks learn by aggregating perceptions into statistics. For a given stimulus, they generate a range of outputs weighted by probability. The weights represent the network's confidence in its judgement
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
If I'm honest about my own cogitations, I can relate to that. People think computers are rigid in their logic, that's what "robotic" means, but neural networks and learning algorithms use rigid logic to build flexible logic
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
Despite everything we hear, many of us stubbornly believe we're so rational and lucid and driven by evidence and careful consideration, but the truth is we just make guesses based on the frequencies at which we see things
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
In Chinese they have an expression, three men make a tiger, 三人成虎, it means you'll believe anything if you hear it from enough people.
1 reply 13 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
Despite all the things that we don't know, we can still model the people around us, and we can do so quite accurately, and we can make very good models using very simple tricks
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Much of what people do is mechanical, and I'm a reductionist in the sense that my models round off all spiritual experience to mere emotion and I think that makes them work better, not worse
3 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
I invite you to disagree with me. Disagreements are assets. When I was younger I spent many hours reading books about the philosophy of mind, about consciousness, about neuroscience (admittedly, books for the layman). I satisfied my curiousity that no one knows anything
5 replies 0 retweets 21 likesShow this thread
Why is it useful to you to believe the world only exists materially (if that is how I understand you)? Sure, nations, souls, gods, stories are all things that can be understood physically but that lens is much harder to use for them than a non-materialist one.
-
-
Replying to @autotrnslucence @0x49fa98
*Neither* Materialist nor Idealist frames really work, if they're taken as truth rather than model. They should have been outmoded by the 20th century-- but habit is a bitch.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.