Philosophy
Proposed new definition of life would include embryos, exclude AI
Jerry Coyne vents about David Klinghoffer
Falsifiability is overrated, some cosmologists say
The key to falsifiability of not evidence but observability
Sabine Hossenfelder on the flight from falsifiability
Jonathan Bartlett and the war on Occam’s Razor
From The Poached Egg: How Darwinism dumbs us down
Why do some biologists hate theism more than physicists do?
British physicist John Polkinghorne thinks that biologists see a more disorderly universe: I think two effects produce this hostility. One is that biologists see a much more perplexing, disorderly, and painful view of reality than is presented by the austere and beautiful order of fundamental physics. . . . There is, however, a second effect at work of much less intellectual respectability. Biology, through the unravelling of the molecular basis of genetics, has scored an impressive victory, comparable to physics’ earlier elucidation of the motions of the solar system through the operation of universal gravity. The post-Newtonian generation was intoxicated with the apparent success of universal mechanism and wrote books boldly proclaiming that man is a machine. Dan Peterson, “Why Read More ›
New England Journal of Medicine, seeking new editor, urged to get woke
Was Thomas Kuhn not so “evil” after all?
Logic spaghetti: Who created God?
Kirk Durston: In defence of experimental science
It is possible to demonstrate that AI will never think as humans do
Based on what we know of how algorithms work, it can be demonstrated mathematically that algorithms cannot deal with non-computable concepts: There is another way to prove a negative besides exhaustively enumerating the possibilities With artificial general intelligence (AGI), if we can identify something algorithms cannot do, and show that humans can do it then we’ve falsified the AGI position without running an infinite number of experiments across all possible algorithms. Eric Holloway, “The Flawed Logic behind “Thinking” Computers, Part II” at Mind Matters If Eric is correct, a great deal of the hype we hear in media is based not only on improbable concepts (the usual stuff) but impossible ones. See, for example, Top Ten AI hypes of 2018 Read More ›
Logic and First Principles, 15: On the architecture of being. Or, are certain abstract entities (“abstracta”) such as numbers, natures, truth etc real? If so, how — and where?
For some weeks now, an underlying persistent debate on the reality of numbers has emerged in several discussion threads at UD. In part, it has been cast in terms of nominalism vs platonic realism; the latter being the effective view of most working mathematicians. Obviously, this is a first principles issue and is worth focussed discussion. Now, No. 14 in this series, on objectivity of aesthetics principles as canons of beauty, begins by pointing to an underlying challenge: We live in a Kant-haunted age, where the “ugly gulch” between our inner world of appearances and judgements and the world of things in themselves is often seen as unbridgeable. Of course, there are many other streams of thought that lead to Read More ›