3 ms·
All of this is cute, but it's the kind of pseudo-philosophizing technobabble a high school student might engage in. You're making metaphysical claims, and very
by bobthechef 6y ago
All of this is cute, but it's the kind of pseudo-philosophizing technobabble a high school student might engage in. You're making metaphysical claims, and very bad and incoherent metaphysical claims at that, so if you're serious, I highly recommend really digging into that material. Bland science fiction is no substitute for real, philosophically rigorous work.
- echelon 6y agoI made no claim of scientific rigour, though we can speak in those terms if you like. My undergrad was in biochem. I have a decent grasp of how complicated biological systems are. I don't even begin to profess to have adequate understanding. I am not a domain expert. That said, I don't see how imagining an engineering solution where measurements are taken of a brain's "state" and replicated with an algorithm are metaphysical psuedoscience. It's out of the reach of today's tech for sure, but I'd like to think we'll eventually make progress and one day be interested in solving this problem. Evolution stumbled upon human brains as a solution for propagation. We're all a lot smarter as hill climbing agents than our genes. I do not think we'll solve this in our lifetimes, but it's so much better to think of than optimizing ad tech, election fraud, and structural inequality. > philosophically rigorous work You lost me here. I don't think something has to be philosophically grounded to be identified as a problem space and tackled. Epistemology ontology whatevers don't fuel rockets.