On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:19 AM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
*> This is essentially the point that both Turing and Goedel made when they > pointed out that human consciousness is not Turing emulable -- it involves > intuitive leaps that are not algorithmic, presumable coming from an > uncodable environment.* > Turing was interested in intelligence and, being a scientist, he knew he couldn't say anything about consciousness unless he made the assumption that observable intelligent behavior implies consciousness. And deductive logic is not the only sort of logic there is, there is also inductive logic and there is no reason a Turing Machine can't be programed for that too and they certainly have been, that's how Chess and GO programs are able to make what any Grand Master would call brilliant intuitive moves. Deductive logic is reliable but although even more useful than deduction inductive logic is just a rule of thumb, and that is why a intuitive leap can sometimes turn out to be brilliant and sometimes it can be dead wrong. As for Godel, I don't think the philosophical musings he made after about 1955 when his only friend Albert Einstein died are worth much, there is no pleasant way to say this but the poor man went nuts. John K Clark > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
