4 ms·
Since you asked, I define reasoning as cambridge does: Reasoning "the process of thinking about something in order to make a decision" Thinking: "the activity
by jb_briant 2y ago
Since you asked, I define reasoning as cambridge does:
Reasoning
"the process of thinking about something in order to make a decision"
Thinking:
"the activity of using your mind to consider something"
Mind:
"the part of a person that makes it possible for him or her to think, feel emotions, and understand things"
I conclude that "An algorithm that searches for the highest probability answer" is not described by "reasoning"
I also think that the definition of Mind of Cambridge is incomplete and lacks the creativity part along with cognition and emotions. But it's a vastly different topic.
- Lerc 2y agoThat seems a bit of an odd definition. A: Doing it with B. B: Using C to do it. C: The part that does B Without defining, "Your", "Consider", "person", "thinking", "feel", and "understand" it could be anything. There's more than enough leeway in those undefineds to subjectively choose whatever you want.
- nuancebydefault 2y agoI would rather call it circular reasoning,a thing humans are very capable of.
- dboreham 2y agoEnter the Chinese Room..
- jb_briant 2y agoWhat do you mean please?
- whitten 2y agoThe Chinese Room is a theoretical room that contains a “Chinese speaker” but actually when given a text to ‘understand’ actually just looks up the text in a huge number of words inside until it finds a way to find a response and then just outputs the response as its reply
- andai 2y ago>I conclude that "An algorithm that searches for the highest probability answer" is not described by "reasoning" I recall reading about a theory of neurology where many thoughts (neural circuits) fired simultaneously and then one would "win" and the others got suppressed. The closest thing I can find right now is Global Workspace Theory.