On intelligence & IQhttps://www.pscp.tv/w/b7DSEDFWR2p2cUFYUlllS098MWRSSlpta1BRck1HQiPaAXczH1pEGvCjxYyo-c89ueVAavqGxem6NWuLCoxZ …
-
-
Replying to @webdevMason
There are “cognitive skills” that contribute to “intelligence”. So then the question is: are those skills a certain kind of knowledge that can be learned?
7 replies 4 retweets 22 likes -
Replying to @ToKTeacher
AFAICT some can be, and many probably cannot be *yet,* and others possibly can't be unless you alter the brain. But it's early days and hard to know. Can aphantasiacs learn to create mental imagery? Not yet, maybe in the future (many have visual dreams!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia
4 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason
Some things some people can do, in principle others cannot...on that view. So the human mind is *not* universal, then.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ToKTeacher @webdevMason
Brett, everything you see around you is a hallucination in your mind. Try using your “universal” mind to alter it. Can you do it? Most can’t normally do this, but can if they consume hallucinogens. How do you explain that?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MatjazLeonardis @webdevMason
How do I explain how hallucinogens cause hallucinations or the fact people are not normally hallucinating? (I'm not following, I'm afraid). My position is: the mind is universal explainer - not that all minds know how to do everything minds in principle are capable of doing.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ToKTeacher @MatjazLeonardis
i'm not sure how we disagree, then. If this is your position, I feel like your first reply was extremely misleading.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason @MatjazLeonardis
My fault for not expressing things more clearly. Given we agree minds are universal, it cannot be the case that there are "some things some people can do, in principle others cannot" nor that some skills can't be acquired unless we "alter the brain" as you said. :)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToKTeacher @MatjazLeonardis
I don't *necessarily* agree that "minds are universal" — that's not my starting point nor a position I'm trying to defend, although I'm unswayed by arguments against it. I do think that some computations require inputs, memory or time that is not available to a human brain today.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason @MatjazLeonardis
Universality (of minds) is a software feature. Memory + time available (clock cycles) are properties of hardware (brains). I expect people to differ in the hardware to some extent...but this isn't what makes them people or "intelligent" on my view. The software does that.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Then frankly, please leave this stuff in philosophy club and out of my discussions on real human beings, who have hardware of various means bestowed upon them via mechanisms entirely beyond their control.
-
-
...I don't fully buy my own sentiment, here, I just REALLY think there's another time and place when I'm trying to address a general audience that's suffering
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Based on what I know about your thoughts on education, a discussion involving hardware isn't what you want. You focus on the implicit / coersive memes that enable or inhibit learning on the software layer. The solution lies here, even for the lay person.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 5 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.