3 ms·
> But I still say that using the word "thinking" for non-macro-scale biomechanical processes is charlatanism. This is some pretty strong language. We all use
by outworlder 6y ago
> But I still say that using the word "thinking" for non-macro-scale biomechanical processes is charlatanism.
This is some pretty strong language.
We all use words to abstract concepts. It's not clear what "thinking" even means from a scientific standpoint. We can be pretty broad on the definition if this is a philosophical discussion.
> suddenly an automatic door is thinking
It is certainly performing an action in response to stimuli. And, given that more electronics are shifting to microcontrollers, a modern automatic door might as well have the machinery required to 'think', or at least, it will have a computer.
There's no evidence that our brain is any different from an automatic door – or more specifically, from an enormous collection of automatic doors.
- yetihehe 6y ago> There's no evidence that our brain is any different from an automatic door – or more specifically, from an enormous collection of automatic doors. "specifically" is key here. People want to differentiate between one tree and whole forest. Maybe you don't, but there is a reason why those two words exist. The same is with one door and enormous collection of doors acting as a whole big brain. The same is with intelligence of automatic doors and of humans. They live on continuum like light and dark, but we still have words for light and dark.