[ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
danust2012 at gmail.com
Sat Sep 27 05:23:52 UTC 2014
John, regarding physicalism, you might want to read this:
and Daniel Stoljar's book _ Physicalism_. The idea is not so easily dismissed as you seem to believe. Stoljar's goes over problems with defining physicalism in detail.
Also, I don't believe work done on it is pointless either. In a sense, most people who believe strong AI is possible hold some variant of physicalism. I mean they believe and work under the presumption that some form of physicalism is true.
Also, physicalism isn't trivial by way of being empty -- any more than Ancient Greek atomism was similarly empty. The latter held all things were ultimately composed of atoms. There wasn't anything else but atoms and stuff made of atoms. Regardless of whether it was true, it didn't suffer from being either trivial or being vacuous because it didn't pose stuff not made of atoms.
My latest Kindle book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat