The editors of Nature are pushing back against the notion that a machine can be the moral equivalent of a human being.
Read More ›
Such vile ideas, with many European cities burning down as one of the main problems facing humanity.
Read More ›
Most of the technological advances by which we usually measure human intelligence awaited the discovery of metal working.
Read More ›
Scientific American notes that the human mind is the hardest problem in science, with no theory emerging as persuasive. COSM will offer a reality check.
Read More ›
The magician can show you something extraordinary. But only your mind can decide what you’ve seen, what it means, and whether it rises to Wow!
Read More ›
Why is a concept like the kludge brain, out of date and at odds with the facts, somehow more representative of science than an inference to design would be?
Read More ›
We aren’t just physical beings dealing with materialistic problems of the external world, and hackable brains are not the ultimate nature of who we really are: Our immaterial, immortal minds and our souls.
Read More ›
That makes me wonder how serious they really are about claiming AI personhood or reflecting on its consequences.
Read More ›
A market economy is like a universe-size system of interacting human minds weighing factors of present and future, making choices, and taking purposeful actions.
Read More ›
Perhaps the endless theorizing with so little result reflects what chance can produce. If researchers ever felt they could risk trying design, we could see if more insight follows.
Read More ›
Instead of claiming, like the eliminationist, that neither humans nor slime molds are really intelligent, the panpsychist will claim that they both are — and then minimize the difference between them.
Read More ›
Egnor offers a serious challenge to anyone who thinks the whole of a human being is purely material.
Read More ›
Materialists cannot apply common standards for assessing evidence because they must refute all evidence of non-materialism. That makes them hard to argue with.
Read More ›
The sometimes-forbidding terminology economists use is rooted in very basic principles of human behavior, ones that can easily be illustrated.
Read More ›
If cognition can exist without a specific material substrate, one possible implication is that an underlying force seeks expression by whatever means are available.
Read More ›
O’Connor “argues that radical emergence may not exist at all. If that’s true, consciousness may not emerge from the brain but instead be fundamental to reality itself.”
Read More ›
The universe contradicts the eliminativist point of view. The laws that govern it are not physical things but they are real.
Read More ›
Computers are not conscious simply because they are programmed to make decisions; plants are likely in the same position.
Read More ›
Koch might wish to consider William James’s neglected theory of consciousness: the brain does not create the mind; it focuses it.
Read More ›
Materialism in neuroscience is not a finding, it is a tenet. It does not need to be true. It simply needs to be enforced.
Read More ›