On 12/06/25 7:01, Edward K. Ream wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:50 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
<off...@riseup.net> wrote:
> I started to listen to a podcast episode that makes a hard critique to
one of the unfortunately foundational papers of the field, "The
imitation game" and all the [presumptous] tone and lack of
understanding behind it.
From first principles I am unimpressed with any critique of Alan
Turing <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing>. He was one of the
giants on whose back we all stand. Let's move on.
That's precisely the point they made and that I find related with this
thread: a billionaire is not a granted genius and a genius in computer
science is not a genius on everything else and, in fact, can device
pretty bad test regarding intelligence, justified in a pretty poorly
written paper, as showcased in the podcast. Like Turing's affirmation of
the overwhelming statistical evidence for telepathy and his
considerations of paranormal phenomena while advocating for the
Imitation game and "considering" and deviating possible criticisms.
First principles should be properly located, for example in places like
geometric axioms and not in Joe/Jane Doe is un-criticable, as (s)he is
who (s)he is. That is the path to fall in argumentative fallacies, like
the principle of authority. An argument should stand on its own merits
and not on the ones of who made it. But yes, let's move on.
Offray
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/565a4a90-4fa7-49df-9f3c-d5d52046e688%40riseup.net.
