Philosophy Now Forum

It's not a rare occurrence for words to have multiple meanings that are more or less related to each other in some way. Sometimes, the different meanings are clearly distinguished. At other times, they are not. When I ask Google dictionary for the meaning of the word "objective", I get thi...

My first issue is that you are griping about an attempt to define subjectivity on a wiki page that is about the subjective/objective divide in general, yet comparing it to Searle's subdivision of of subjectivity into ontological and epistemic categories. I did not even complain, let alone gripe. I ...

Seems simplistic and misguided. Not simplistic but a lot simpler than a lot of people make it out to be ( they need the imaginary complexity so that they can talk endlessly about nothing, a common occurrence in modern philosophy. ) The word "art" does not imply value. People should stop u...

It seems like you are just changing the definition to one that suits you, with the somewhat flimsy rationale that you just like it better. All sorts of things "seem" to people on the Internet. If you think the definition is wrong, feel free to correct it. Addressing the motives, rather th...

John Searle died 3 days after I started this thread.

AI does understand better. Writings I have been accused of for "word salads" or "incoherent" have been analyzed by AI and explained back to me, with examples and questions to prove what I have been saying, and the AI gives an analysis which is accurate, in mirroring what I mean ...

accelafine wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 1:21 am I'm sure google search is generally reasonably pleasant as well. If you think you are interacting with a human with 'understanding' when you use ChatGPT then I feel sorry for you.

Google Search is nowhere near as good.

And human arrogance isn't good either.

accelafine wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 12:38 am As awful as humans generally are, these obnoxious, Americanised 'bots' don't even come close.

They can understand a lot of things, a lot easier, than many people, including forum members, can.

They are already much more pleasant to interact with.

But maybe he was offering you a better job?

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 8:32 am You should seriously consider stopping being rude and obnoxious to other posters. This is my thread topic and I will direct it in a way I think it should go.

Perhaps you should try listening to your own advice.

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 7:43 am You’re welcome.

You should seriously consider learning how to mind your own business instead of constantly sticking your nose into matters that are obviously beyond your capacity to handle them.

The Turing test is merely a projection of how humans percieve consciousness, it does not prove or disprove it. It's accurate to the extent that people intuitively know what consciousness is and how to recognize it. It's an easier solution, requiring less thought, but significantly less rigorous, an...

1. We knew people had consciousness long before Western classical music was invented. Why can't we use that same type of reasoning for AI? 2. Consciousness is the ability to perceive reality that does not immediately surround the perceiver. Thus, a machine that can recognize spatial objects at a dis...

Age wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 5:10 am If 'this' is what you continue to 'see', and/or really want to 'believe' is true, then 'this' is perfectly fine and okay, with me.

I can write a Commodore 64 program that simulates your mind. Your responses are THAT generic.

Once more, 'this one', very laughingly, actually believes, absolutely, that it can correct 'my views'. You wanted to say "laughably" not "laughingly". You didn't want to say that I believe in something while I laugh. Rather, you wanted to say that the fact that I believe in some...