3 ms·
I think maybe what they're trying to say is that while CFD can model wind in a complex system to a useful degree of accuracy ... the model will never be wind.
by sirsinsalot 4y ago
I think maybe what they're trying to say is that while CFD can model wind in a complex system to a useful degree of accuracy ... the model will never be wind.
With AI that application of logic is an argument around the semantics of interface.
That's the most compassionate take on their words I could muster.
- mannykannot 4y agoThis seems to be correct - it appears to be the "a model is not that which it models" argument, which is Searle's only response to the Simulation Reply to his Chinese Room - but a model of a thing can have properties of that thing (a model boat can float, create a wake etc.), and an informational process can be modeled by another. Are minds informational processes instantiated by brains? It is plausible, and the model argument does not rule it out.
- sirsinsalot 4y agoIf it was the ops intent, they mangled it to the point I'm not even sure.
- tacitusarc 4y agoInterestingly, a model of a boat is, in itself, a small boat.
- mannykannot 4y agoTo be clear, that doesn't refute the point I am making. For anyone who suspects it might (I'm not sure how...) consider this: a model of the Titanic (or a replica, for that matter) is not the Titanic. A model of your brain would neither be your brain nor necessarily a brain at all, but whether it could think is a different question.
- tacitusarc 4y agoI was only observing that while the model of a thing is not always that thing, sometimes it is.