Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I can think of like 5 different ways that you could define "a wandering mind," yet the author just takes it for granted and acts like we all "get it," even though the definition you choose might change the conclusions she reaches and the nature of the discussion.

It's just that vagueness that characterizes discussions about consciousness or subjectivity. It makes me think we have an incredibly long way to go before we accurately model the human subject, which is a prerequisite to any meaningful AI.



You may be interested in this paper by Hubert Dreyfus, "Why Heideggerian AI failed and how fixing it would require making it even more Heideggerian."

http://leidlmair.at/doc/WhyHeideggerianAIFailed.pdf


Thank you! A very interesting and insightful criticism of various approaches to AI, especially what we can learn from GOFAI. Do you have any other papers to recommend?


You might check out stuff from John Haugeland, who coined "GOFAI" back in the 80s. Here's a nice essay I quickly found online (that's sort of indirectly about AI) for example: http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/haugeland/Mind+...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: