3 ms·
> but in their hearts are capable of deciding I question both the organ and the action.
by exe34 2y ago
> but in their hearts are capable of deciding
I question both the organ and the action.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- slowmovintarget 2y agoQuestion, but perhaps, open your heart to recent research... There is neural tissue in and around the heart. There are studies showing personality changes and memory inculcation as a result of heart transplants. Recipients end up with memory and sometimes traits of the donor. Are we sure? No. But neither should you be. Question but be open to answers you may not expect.
- exe34 2y agoI'm not sure, but I'd bet £200 that within 10 years it'll still not be something that 99.9% of medical schools will teach. just because I'm not sure, it doesn't make both cases remotely equally likely.
- slowmovintarget 2y agohttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31739081/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31739081/
- lo_zamoyski 2y agoHe’s speaking to a popular audience in a poetic fashion. No one believes a pump in your chest is the seat of intellgence, even if it may be involved in some extended and removed manner with the expression of intelligence. If Francis held Thomistic views on the subject, then even the brain, while needed for human intelligence, does not suffice for its operation, as functions like abstraction require the intellect, which cannot be entirely physical in operation since form cannot exist in matter without also instantiating the form, something by definition opposed to abstraction.
- exe34 2y ago> He’s speaking to a popular audience in a poetic fashion. No one believes a pump in your chest is the seat of intellgence, even if it may be involved in some extended and removed manner with the expression of intelligence. others on this very thread are proposing this exact extension. I'll ignore the supernatural suggestion.
- lo_zamoyski 2y agoYou're misreading what I've written and being intentionally obtuse. I didn't say the heart plays a role in intelligence. I simply allowed for the possibility for the sake of argument. The central claim is that no one (here, Francis and his writers) who uses the word "heart" colloquially is making the claim that the heart-as-organ is the seat of intelligence or what have you. You're committing a vulgar equivocation fallacy that the average person with common sense would recognize. I have a difficult time believing you don't understand something so obvious.
- j_timberlake 2y agoPeople downvote this guy because obviously nobody actually thinks with their blood-pumping organ. But as for the quote, it's incredibly clear how little empathy most people have towards others, to the point where AI will easily out-empathy them, both as a conversationalist and as a robotic assistant (such as a 24/7 robot nurse with no other patients).
- aredox 2y ago> it's incredibly clear how little empathy most people have towards others Sorry but not everyone is an American. And as Conway's law applies, of course AI done by American or Chinese companies will be oppressive - with only superficial politeness à la GladOS.
- j_timberlake 2y agoWhich side was your country on in WW2? And what does your country contribute to AI safety?
- aredox 2y agoWhich side is your country today?
- j_timberlake 2y agoMust have been pretty bad if you can't even say, but feel free to keep blaming your problems on the USA, you'll do that anyway.