> Aside from your answer being rude, it's also unhelpful in that it doens't address the question asked and instead relies on reductio ad absurdum to pretend to

> Aside from your answer being rude, it's also unhelpful in that it doens't address the question asked and instead relies on reductio ad absurdum to pretend to make a point. That is indeed often the kind of answer that a philosophical question deserves. > If you'd like to take a crack at a helpful answer, perhaps educate us all on what it WOULD take for you to consider a NN to actually "know" something in the same way that we say a human or other sentient animal does. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?