2023-09-14 15:09 UTC
@tyrell_turing@fediscience.org
Nobody doubts that you can mechanicize rote human behavior. In fact, that's exactly the point of a universal Turing machine. It is designed to implement any process that can be machanicized that way.
How you get from that to "the brain or the world are a computer/mechanism" is mysterious to me. And it was to Turing and Church who always resisted such an unwarranted extrapolation.
No extended discussion needed, really. There is simply nothing that supports your worldview...
Replies (2)
-
@NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social 2023-09-14 15:33
@yoginho@spore.social @tyrell_turing@fediscience.org @neurobuzz@a.gup.pe ⬆️
-
@debivort@drosophila.social 2023-09-14 15:41
@yoginho@spore.social @tyrell_turing@fediscience.org This thread is a fun read, but I wonder if you are both working from the same definition of computing to ask if cognition or physical processes are computation? If you each were to independently write down definitions of computation, how operationally similar would they be? If you have very different definitions, it's a disagreement of assumptions, not one that can be resolved through evidence. cc @NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social re: my comment in your thread on jargon.