/sci/ - Science & Math

>astro-anything
can you fellows thing of more useless fields atm? i can't. aerospcae is useful on the other hand but looking through telescopes and calculating why black holes this and that has no practical use what so fucking ever.

>>10881345
>Plus, I don't think you need to get rid of the "living" portion of the argument. If anything, I feel that it is the most important part of it all.

I would disagree, the living portion of it only results in personifying and thinking illogically and emotionally about these 'agents' as the concept of being 'confined' as you say is troubling to people. As I say later in this post, rather than using the term object I should have used a more descriptive term. By dehumanizing the agent, I instead was hoping towards thinking about it more as a neural network. The issue with the whole debate is that we've established objects can be predictable, and as you scale up the systems, nothing changes except for the complexity of the problem, and the 'face' of the 'object' in this case becoming a living human, and we apply emotions and irrationality to those humans and we can't think about it logically, and as a result somehow the people attempt to draw the conclusion that a ball can be predictable but humans cant.

>>10881388

>You still have to consider the layers in which the network determines which neuron to feed, and the different outcomes are due to probability...

I understand what you mean, but my reasoning for making it as simple as I did is to appeal to a mainstream audience which may not have experience with these systems, and despite my attempt at simplification I still did a poor job explaining it upon a further re-read. I will try to improve on that in the future.

>I think instead of viewing something living as an "object", which then implies the absence of consciousness, I think you would agree that it would be moreso making a mathematical model (function) for the physical system or agent at hand.

Yeah, absolutely. I should have not used the term object, but you understood what I meant, and its easier to present than a more accurate term which may be more confusing or convoluted.

Came from /b/ to ask, does anyone here believe in free will? It seems like everything we know scientifically leads to determinism.

To be clear, when I say determinism I mean the kind where our brains 'make decisions', but everything in the entire universe leading up to that point has shoehorned that decision coming into fruition.