Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is such a short-sighted and close-minded view of philosophy, it boggles the mind..

> Philosophers can not seem to comprehend how a mass of meat can create consciousness and take leaps to try to rule out the mass of meat, regardless of the fact that they all know that when bad things happen to said mass of meat bad things also happen to said consciousness.

You seem to be referring to dualism, a philosophical idea that is largely discredited among philosophers since the early 1900's. Functionalism, emergentism, materialism, and all other leading serious philosophies of mind that implicate the brain were first formalized and studied by philosophers, not neuroscientists.

> The Turing Test could not have been a more wrong direction to define AGI. Looking like something does not make you that thing, and it did not at all address capability, just the appearance of capability.

And philosophers are among the most vocal critics of the Turing Test. The Turing Test was made by Turing, who was first and foremost a mathematician & logician, not a philosopher of mind.

> Insight into intelligence will come slowly, and it will come from examining, categorizing, and eventually understanding the internal workings of the human brain.

Which, of course, is what modern philosophers of mind do.




As I already stated, the primary rebuke against the Turing Test was the Chinese room. It was a proper response to a horrible idea.

Then what did philosophers do? Well they applied the Chinese Room argument to all of conciseness, a blunder even worse than the Turing Test.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: