>Human-like is not the only way to approach doing or learning. I would also say that we shouldn't agree that there's an irreducibly human-like way to do things

>Human-like is not the only way to approach doing or learning. I would also say that we shouldn't agree that there's an irreducibly human-like way to do things that only belongs to humans. The things we think 'belong' to humans, such as our intrinsic bike-riding ability, may well turn out to be not intrinsic at all, and able to be modeled in all salient ways by a machine. I think if we allow that distinction to be made, and proceed to argue that machines can learn in different ways, it allows a very strange human-essentiallism to go unchallenged.