Kartik Agaram
02/13/2023, 5:52 AMguitarvydas
02/13/2023, 9:27 AMJimmy Miller
02/13/2023, 4:56 PMKartik Agaram
02/13/2023, 6:03 PMJimmy Miller
02/13/2023, 6:21 PMOrganisms reproducing to create new consciousness is not just an interface construct.On his view everything is interface, because that's the only thing we have access to. We have no access to the world at all. Our cognitive faculties are not mapped to truth at all. Nothing we know is true. As for why this statement is interface? Organisms are things that exist in space and time. As he tells us, space and time don't exist. They are interfaces. So if organisms exist in space and time and space and time don't exist, organisms don't exist. If I'm honest, this kind of stuff bothers me so much. I see it as pure sophistry. I truly recommend reading Kant or Berkeley, or James or Pierce or Rorty, or Putnum or any philosopher in the Kantian or pragmatist bent over this stuff.
Kartik Agaram
02/13/2023, 7:00 PMJimmy Miller
02/13/2023, 7:02 PMKartik Agaram
02/13/2023, 7:02 PMJimmy Miller
02/13/2023, 7:44 PMRobert Kajic
02/14/2023, 2:45 AMJack Rusher
02/14/2023, 6:59 AMKonrad Hinsen
02/16/2023, 7:25 AMJack Rusher
02/16/2023, 10:43 AMKonrad Hinsen
02/16/2023, 1:32 PMKartik Agaram
02/16/2023, 3:43 PMJack Rusher
02/17/2023, 4:26 PMKartik Agaram
02/18/2023, 4:13 PMKonrad Hinsen
02/19/2023, 9:37 AMKartik Agaram
02/19/2023, 9:44 AMJack Rusher
02/19/2023, 11:51 AMKonrad Hinsen
02/19/2023, 8:13 PMKartik Agaram
02/19/2023, 8:24 PMJimmy Miller
02/19/2023, 8:27 PMKonrad Hinsen
02/20/2023, 7:29 AMKartik Agaram
02/20/2023, 7:41 AMJack Rusher
02/20/2023, 9:38 AMJimmy Miller
02/20/2023, 4:04 PMWe agree that it's not testable. I'm trying to see if it's even coherent+new.(Hoffman doesn't agree that it's not testable, which is one of his major problems) The incoherent part are not his metaphysical claims (claims about how the world is) but his epistemological claims (claims about how/what we can know). The epistemological claims he advocates for are incoherent. The metaphysical claims are not new. He is just an idealist in the Berkeleyan sense. The material isn't real, What is real is the mental. Objects aren't material things, they are things of consciousness. If you want a very readable survey of idealism, Chalmers has a nice paper on it (even mentions Hoffmans view) https://philpapers.org/archive/CHAIAT-11.pdf
Kartik Agaram
02/21/2023, 4:14 AM(Hoffman doesn't agree that it's not testable, which is one of his major problems)Yes. I changed my mind at https://futureofcoding.slack.com/archives/C5U3SEW6A/p1676736793668239?thread_ts=1676267575.200009&cid=C5U3SEW6A. He has some claims and he's testing something. But he's not testing his claims, and his claims are not testable.
Jimmy Miller
02/21/2023, 4:39 AMKartik Agaram
02/21/2023, 4:48 AMJimmy Miller
02/21/2023, 5:08 AMKartik Agaram
02/21/2023, 5:29 AMJimmy Miller
02/21/2023, 6:14 AMKartik Agaram
02/21/2023, 6:18 AMKonrad Hinsen
02/23/2023, 8:38 AMJack Rusher
02/23/2023, 10:32 AMKonrad Hinsen
02/23/2023, 1:35 PMJack Rusher
03/02/2023, 10:23 AMThere is no theory we may hold and no observation we can make that will retain so much as its old defective reference to the facts if the net be altered. Tinitus, paraesthesias, hallucinations, delusions, confusions and disorientation intervene. Thus empiry confirms that if our nets are undefined, our facts are undefined, and to the “real” we can attribute not so much as one quality or “form.” With determination of the net, the unknowable object of knowledge, the “thing in itself,” ceases to be unknowable.I'm writing something about artificial neurons at the moment, and thought of this thread when I noticed that McCulloch and Pitts were smoking some dank philosophy in 1943. 😹 https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./epxing/Class/10715/reading/McCulloch.and.Pitts.pdf
Jimmy Miller
03/02/2023, 1:48 PMJack Rusher
03/02/2023, 2:37 PM