I can't speak for Colin but frankly I find his approach refreshing. What is basically saying is that if you want to make artificial cognition, then make it the same as actual cognition; in other words, it isn't artificial, it's real, and real cognition is the only cognition empirically found. It's brilliant in its simplicity.
Personally I think it's possible that his approach, evolving, might eventually yield real cognition. I also think AGI can succeed on more conventional and future substrates (quantum, neuromorphic etc). A combination might work! But how to know? We get to work... On 12/23/20, WriterOfMinds <[email protected]> wrote: > Colin reminds me of Searle. I think the claim that underlies all his > arguments is "cognition cannot be achieved by algorithms." Therefore, he > regards any algorithmic approach (including algorithms that model neuronal > EM fields) as a non-starter. In his mind, experiments that measure the > achievements of any algorithmic approach or brain simulation are still not > "empirical," because any algorithm (including algorithms that simulate the > brain) is a theoretical model of cognition rather than a potential > achievement of cognition. An analogy that I remember from either him or > Searle or both is, "a simulation of a rainstorm will not get your computer > wet." > > I don't agree with him, but watching all of you talk past each other is > frustrating me. ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tf319c0e4c79c9397-M4cc4868847b7958df8981954 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
