|
Left
margin |
|
Is knowledge measurable? If so what are the units of
measurement? Are there degrees of understanding? What are the criteria?
|
|
|
What's
in a name? or: est nomen omen?
|
|
|
Human understanding versus
'machine understanding'. Varieties of understanding: u.
language/symbols or u. real objects/processes/actions (is understanding
mathematics special?). Language understanding is not possible without
understanding 'reality', i.e. symbols/words/narratives are 'grounded'
in reality. |
|
|
The
meaning of symbols emerges from acts of
communication, just as life emerged from the interaction of atoms and
molecules by "selective amplification" of features. Evolution is the
widening of semantic spaces. |
|
|
Is
"thinking" (or rather: "thinking we are
thinking") the result of communication? Would a Kaspar
Hauser ever become aware of his own thoughts? |
|
|
Free Will(1): Bodies (structured matter) do
what their structures make them do. The structures of human bodies
entail the capability of (reflecting upon themselves and) assigning
values to what they (can) do, to compare, rank, and choose. |
|
|
A truism: computers are as smart as we
program them to be. Suppose we find out how to build/program computers
so that they can (somehow) ground themselves in the real physical world
(with sensory experiences possibly going far beyond ours or at least
different from ours). Hence they could outsmart humans just as humans -
once the biological machinery was in place - outsmarted the rest of
nature. Or would they? |
|
|
Hilbert's programme failed but it failed in a
grandiose way: it boiled down to computer programs. |
|