Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    It is not established that human beings are not themselve... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There is no strong reason to be confident that real thought can only be located in continuous-state machines.

    It is not established that human beings are not themselves essentially discrete-state machines.

    Consciousness & MindPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityConsciousness & Mind

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Personal Identity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Skepticism
    1 linked

    Related

    The claim that real thought requires a continuous-state machine requires justifi...There is no strong reason to be confident that real thought can only be located ...

    Similar

    The concept of intelligence does not rule out intelligent beings imple...84%The objection that digital machines are deterministic while humans are...82%Therefore, the deterministic nature of digital machine operations is n...81%The argument that people are not machines fails to establish an obviou...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: turing-test
    View source passageHide passage
    Turing’s response to this kind of argument seems to be that a continuous-state machine can be imitated by discrete-state machines with very small levels of error. Just as differential analyzers can be imitated by digital computers to within quite small margins of error, so too, the conversation of human beings can be imitated by digital computers to margins of error that would not be detected by ordinary interrogators playing the imitation game. It is not clear that this is the right kind of res

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective