Artificial Intelligence brains and computation vs contemplation Intelligent Design Mind

Eric Holloway: Artificial neural networks can show that the mind isn’t the brain

Spread the love

Because artificial neural networks are a better version of the brain, whatever neural networks cannot do, the brain cannot do:

If humans can solve problems that neural networks cannot solve, the human mind is doing something a neural network cannot do. Hence, the human mind is also doing something that the brain cannot do.

At this point, we can say that, because neural networks can’t compete against the human mind except in very narrow fields, then neural networks won’t ever match human performance — and hence the mind is not the brain.

Though compelling, this argument will not satisfy nerds, who want hard scientific data. So, I will give you some hard scientific data in my next post where I present a logic experiment that shows that humans can provably outperform neural networks.

Eric Holloway, “Artificial neural networks can show that the mind isn’t the brain” at Mind Matters News (July 24, 2022)

Takehome: The human mind can do tasks that an artificial neural network (ANN) cannot. Because the brain works like an ANN, the mind cannot just be what the brain does.


You may also wish to read: The Salem Hypothesis: Why engineers view the universe as designed. Eric Holloway: Not because we’re terrorists or black-and-white thinkers, as claimed. A simple computer program shows the limits of creating information by chance. Engineers doubt chance evolution because a computer using an evolution-based program would be chugging away well past the heat death of our universe.

4 Replies to “Eric Holloway: Artificial neural networks can show that the mind isn’t the brain

  1. 1
    Alan Fox says:

    Takehome: The human mind can do tasks that an artificial neural network (ANN) cannot. Because the brain works like an ANN, the mind cannot just be what the brain does.

    Someone spotting Eric’s logic elsewhere constructs a syllogism and points out a difficulty:
    1. People can do things that can’t be done by the kinds of ANNs that we presently know how to build.
    2. But the brain works exactly like the kind of ANN that we know how to build.
    3. Therefore, whatever is allowing us to do whatever it is that ANNs cannot do, cannot be explained in terms of the brain.

    Phrased that way, it should be perfectly clear that the desired conclusion (3) only follows (1) if (2) is true. And yet there is no reason at all to believe that (2) is true, and overwhelming reasons (from both neuroscience and from AI research) to believe that (2) is false. Hence the argument fails.

  2. 2
    relatd says:

    The average person never discusses ‘artificial neural networks’ primarily because the concept is totally outside of their experience. In brief, attempts are being made to duplicate all of the functions of the human brain. That’s all this is. The goal, if achieved, is to make it faster than the human mind and this translates into solving problems more quickly. But this brings up some problems: the machine is a slave and it has no concept of morality. It can solve problems for good and evil ends according to the will of its owner. It has no liability, just its owner. Like using a gun to defend or to murder, the goal is to create an ANN for good ends. The problem is the bad guys also want an ANN for their own purposes.

  3. 3
    ET says:

    Because artificial neural networks are a better version of the brain…

    According to who?

  4. 4
    Querius says:

    Note: Alan Fox first conflates the mind with the brain and then asserts that the logic doesn’t make sense.

    Eric Holloway’s linked article starts out like this:

    What is the human mind? AI pioneer Marvin Minsky (1927–2016) said in 1987 that essentially “Minds are what brains do.” That is, the mind is the result of electrical waves cycling through the brain, as neurons spike and synapses transmit signals. But is that true? Can we test this idea?

    Maybe, just maybe it would be advisable to actually read the article before trashing it.

    I guess that’s not obvious for everyone.

    -Q

Leave a Reply