Obviously I’m not a Strong AI guy, and am pretty much in the David Chalmers camp on the hard problem.
Conversation
I’m not saying this quite right. An intelligence exists within a thermodynamic boundary that separates it from the environment but firs not *isolate* it. The nature of the intelligence is entangled with the specific environment and the boundary actually embodies much of it.
5
2
15
Replying to
I disagree pretty strongly with you on both accounts. The hard problem is only hard because that's the way it is posed. It's the same basic error as Searle's artificial separation of syntax and semantics (obviating pragmatics):
1
5
When it comes to questions of embodiment and thermodynamics, there are two ways to go, and both involve identifying the correct level of abstraction at which to talk about the dynamics of information:
2
Replying to
This is why I don’t engage with your crowd. Too far apart for useful discussion. You guys do you and our descendants can decide who was right.
1
Replying to
I'm not sure which crowd you think I'm with. The thing is that I completely agree with you on the poverty of the IQ++ model of intelligence and the otherwise intellectual bankruptcy of the (utilitarian) LW model of AGI that dominates the discourse.
2
2
Replying to
I pegged you as strong AI crowd due to your dismissal of hard-problem crowd as mysterian 😆
2
1
Are you saying this is incorrect tagging? How would you characterize your position on the map?
1
1
Replying to
Me and go under the label 'neorationalism' which we take every possible opportunity to distinguish from LW style rationalism (deontologistics.co/2018/02/11/on-). Basically, we think AGI means computationally precise German Idealism (Kant and Hegel).
2
10
Ah you guys have been in my peripheral vision via but haven’t had a chance to dig in yet. So now there are post, meta, and neo rationalists on the scene. I was going by pararationalist a while back as a joke. I may resurrect that.
1
3
Take in intended joke spirit
Quote Tweet
Hmm. @Meaningness has claimed metarationality and @sarahdoingthing has claimed postrationality. I need to claim a prefix too. I think I'll take "para."
I'm a pararationalist. Yay!
Show this thread
We've been using the term since around 2014, but we're not exactly mainstream. I'm a big believer in experimental pluralism and solidarity across different intellectual commitments. Para-rationalism is good by me. 🖖
2
5
Show replies


