Joseph R Larsen | Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (original) (raw)
Uploads
Drafts by Joseph R Larsen
This paper proposes a new metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine int... more This paper proposes a new metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine intelligence. By drawing an analogy from Kant's incongruent counterparts, it posits two deterministic worlds-one comprising a human agent and the other comprising a machine agent. Using ideas from Wittgenstein and Gödel, the paper defines "deterministic knowledge" and investigates how this knowledge is processed differently in those worlds. By postulating the distinctiveness of human intelligence, this paper addresses what it refers to as "the vantage point problem"-namely, how to make a qualitative distinction between the determinist and the universe where the determinist belongs.
The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterpa... more The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterparts a new metaphysical framework for a valid distinction between human intelligence and machine intelligence that finds its roots in conventional functionalism. In the end, the writing provides a peculiar philosophical calculus in accordance with special relativity that ultimately provides a basis for "non-trivial" determinism.
" 1. The incongruent counterparts 2. Deterministic knowledge 3. Dennett's "Derrida-like" interpre... more " 1. The incongruent counterparts 2. Deterministic knowledge 3. Dennett's "Derrida-like" interpretation of our intelligence 4. Movement as an actualization of a metaphysical possibility 5. Knowledge-in-hindsight for artificial intelligence 6. Super-relationalism contra special relativity ABSTRACT The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterparts a new metaphysical framework for a valid distinction between human intelligence and machine intelligence that finds its root in conventional functionalism. Under this framework, this writing also analyzes the implications of both determinism and indeterminism and their relations to human reason. Moreover, Jacques Derrida's deconstructionism and Daniel Dennett's "trivial" determinism are challenged under the same framework, along with providing an alternative view that attempts to settle the issue of absolute/relational space between Newton and Leibniz. Also, after introducing a peculiar philosophical calculus in accordance with special relativity that ultimately provides a basis for "non-trivial" determinism, the writing concludes by noting that Hegelian philosophy is necessarily the latent holistic framework for scientific investigation regardless of scientists' awareness of it.
In order to understand Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it is first necessary to delve into the n... more In order to understand Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it is first necessary to delve into the notions of absolute space and relational space.
They are understood to have the following characteristics:
Absolute space: Even if there were only one single body in space, the body in principle could move.
Relational space: If there were only one single body in space, the body could not move at all because motion is defined only in relation to other bodies.
1. If the universe is deterministic, deterministic knowledge (hereinafter, “D knowledge”) exists.... more 1. If the universe is deterministic, deterministic knowledge (hereinafter, “D knowledge”) exists.
1.1 The D knowledge exists in comprehensible form.
1.11 Even if there are imperceivable phenomena, the D knowledge need not include descriptions on what cannot be verbalized.
1.12 The D knowledge may relate to imperceivable phenomena only in a way that the imperceivables relate to our perceivables.
1.20 Nonetheless, the D knowledge cannot be reached by the human mind.
1.21 Access to D knowledge is logically impossible, on the grounds of self-reference paradox and diagonal argument.
1.22 Thus, determinism cannot mean that all the events are calculable simply because they are predetermined.
1.23 A genuinely meaningful form of the D knowledge may be accessible, if the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The deterministic universe belongs in a larger cosmos;
(ii) Injection of the diagonal knowledge of the deterministic universe into the universe from the cosmos is indeterminately possible; and
(iii) The event of the injection occurs and the D knowledge becomes accessible to the human mind.
1.3 Nevertheless, the accessed D knowledge is no longer valid as D knowledge and transforms into mere descriptions on what could have occurred otherwise.
1.4 Thus, it is impossible for a human agent to ascertain the determinacy of the universe through the D knowledge.
2. An indeterministic universe is such that every time it begins from the same cause, it may unfold according to a different scenario than before.
2.1 A deterministic universe and an indeterministic universe share one thing in common: It is only through the passage of time that a human agent belonging in either universe is able to identify the scenario of the universe up to a particular time point.
2.11 The principal difference between the two is that D knowledge exists for the former but not for the latter.
2.111 The D knowledge exists in comprehensible form for us but is available only to those that can cross the time axis of our universe at will or to a transcendental being who holds the script of the scenario.
2.2 An indeterministic universe, however, “constructs” its scenario successively through the passage of time.
3. Therefore, whether our universe is predetermined or not matters only from a viewpoint that can be established in the outside of our universe.
3.1 However, if there is nothing outside of the universe, this issue can matter to no one.
If I should pick three thinkers that influenced me the most, I would name Nietzsche, Robert Green... more If I should pick three thinkers that influenced me the most, I would name Nietzsche, Robert Greene (self-help book writer), and Lao Tzu. Although most portions of the text written by my third picked thinker are shrouded in ambiguity, I personally believe that his Tao philosophy is so grand and deep that it even embraces the other two respectable writers. I personally concede, though, that I do not have high regards for China as a nation. Nevertheless, the profundity of the Tao Te Ching was sufficient to grab my attention, which led to creation of this blog. I was born and raised in a country that has a high regard for Confucianism. Although I was not familiar with the name of Confucius when I was young, I can see now that part of my value system was greatly influenced by him. However, I personally conclude that there is a reason why his philosophy is eclipsed by Lao Tzu. I wish to discuss the content of the Tao Te Ching in detail chapter by chapter. Thanks.
This paper proposes a new metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine int... more This paper proposes a new metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine intelligence. By drawing an analogy from Kant's incongruent counterparts, it posits two deterministic worlds-one comprising a human agent and the other comprising a machine agent. Using ideas from Wittgenstein and Gödel, the paper defines "deterministic knowledge" and investigates how this knowledge is processed differently in those worlds. By postulating the distinctiveness of human intelligence, this paper addresses what it refers to as "the vantage point problem"-namely, how to make a qualitative distinction between the determinist and the universe where the determinist belongs.
The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterpa... more The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterparts a new metaphysical framework for a valid distinction between human intelligence and machine intelligence that finds its roots in conventional functionalism. In the end, the writing provides a peculiar philosophical calculus in accordance with special relativity that ultimately provides a basis for "non-trivial" determinism.
" 1. The incongruent counterparts 2. Deterministic knowledge 3. Dennett's "Derrida-like" interpre... more " 1. The incongruent counterparts 2. Deterministic knowledge 3. Dennett's "Derrida-like" interpretation of our intelligence 4. Movement as an actualization of a metaphysical possibility 5. Knowledge-in-hindsight for artificial intelligence 6. Super-relationalism contra special relativity ABSTRACT The purpose of this writing is to provide through extrapolation from Kant's incongruent counterparts a new metaphysical framework for a valid distinction between human intelligence and machine intelligence that finds its root in conventional functionalism. Under this framework, this writing also analyzes the implications of both determinism and indeterminism and their relations to human reason. Moreover, Jacques Derrida's deconstructionism and Daniel Dennett's "trivial" determinism are challenged under the same framework, along with providing an alternative view that attempts to settle the issue of absolute/relational space between Newton and Leibniz. Also, after introducing a peculiar philosophical calculus in accordance with special relativity that ultimately provides a basis for "non-trivial" determinism, the writing concludes by noting that Hegelian philosophy is necessarily the latent holistic framework for scientific investigation regardless of scientists' awareness of it.
In order to understand Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it is first necessary to delve into the n... more In order to understand Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it is first necessary to delve into the notions of absolute space and relational space.
They are understood to have the following characteristics:
Absolute space: Even if there were only one single body in space, the body in principle could move.
Relational space: If there were only one single body in space, the body could not move at all because motion is defined only in relation to other bodies.
1. If the universe is deterministic, deterministic knowledge (hereinafter, “D knowledge”) exists.... more 1. If the universe is deterministic, deterministic knowledge (hereinafter, “D knowledge”) exists.
1.1 The D knowledge exists in comprehensible form.
1.11 Even if there are imperceivable phenomena, the D knowledge need not include descriptions on what cannot be verbalized.
1.12 The D knowledge may relate to imperceivable phenomena only in a way that the imperceivables relate to our perceivables.
1.20 Nonetheless, the D knowledge cannot be reached by the human mind.
1.21 Access to D knowledge is logically impossible, on the grounds of self-reference paradox and diagonal argument.
1.22 Thus, determinism cannot mean that all the events are calculable simply because they are predetermined.
1.23 A genuinely meaningful form of the D knowledge may be accessible, if the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The deterministic universe belongs in a larger cosmos;
(ii) Injection of the diagonal knowledge of the deterministic universe into the universe from the cosmos is indeterminately possible; and
(iii) The event of the injection occurs and the D knowledge becomes accessible to the human mind.
1.3 Nevertheless, the accessed D knowledge is no longer valid as D knowledge and transforms into mere descriptions on what could have occurred otherwise.
1.4 Thus, it is impossible for a human agent to ascertain the determinacy of the universe through the D knowledge.
2. An indeterministic universe is such that every time it begins from the same cause, it may unfold according to a different scenario than before.
2.1 A deterministic universe and an indeterministic universe share one thing in common: It is only through the passage of time that a human agent belonging in either universe is able to identify the scenario of the universe up to a particular time point.
2.11 The principal difference between the two is that D knowledge exists for the former but not for the latter.
2.111 The D knowledge exists in comprehensible form for us but is available only to those that can cross the time axis of our universe at will or to a transcendental being who holds the script of the scenario.
2.2 An indeterministic universe, however, “constructs” its scenario successively through the passage of time.
3. Therefore, whether our universe is predetermined or not matters only from a viewpoint that can be established in the outside of our universe.
3.1 However, if there is nothing outside of the universe, this issue can matter to no one.
If I should pick three thinkers that influenced me the most, I would name Nietzsche, Robert Green... more If I should pick three thinkers that influenced me the most, I would name Nietzsche, Robert Greene (self-help book writer), and Lao Tzu. Although most portions of the text written by my third picked thinker are shrouded in ambiguity, I personally believe that his Tao philosophy is so grand and deep that it even embraces the other two respectable writers. I personally concede, though, that I do not have high regards for China as a nation. Nevertheless, the profundity of the Tao Te Ching was sufficient to grab my attention, which led to creation of this blog. I was born and raised in a country that has a high regard for Confucianism. Although I was not familiar with the name of Confucius when I was young, I can see now that part of my value system was greatly influenced by him. However, I personally conclude that there is a reason why his philosophy is eclipsed by Lao Tzu. I wish to discuss the content of the Tao Te Ching in detail chapter by chapter. Thanks.