Timeline for Can knowledge about argumentation be sufficient for philosophical logic without too symbolic or mathematical concepts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2013 at 15:16 | history | edited | Dennis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed dead link
|
| Oct 20, 2012 at 21:42 | comment | added | Xodarap | Rex: I do not mean to agree with Lucas or Penrose (I don't), I just wanted to point out that an understanding of their argument requires a fairly deep understanding of logic. | |
| Oct 20, 2012 at 21:39 | comment | added | Rex Kerr | @ThomasKlimpel - Waving your hands about creativity is waving your hands. Do you have any theoretical basis for assuming that one cannot compute creativity? Or that various unproven alternatives cannot be explored in depth by an algorithm? (Chess programs already do the latter.) Does having the last word make one's truth-statements any more true? | |
| Oct 20, 2012 at 21:15 | comment | added | Thomas Klimpel | @RexKerr There are good reasons to believe that all (present, past and future) human minds together (including the tools they will invent) are better problem solvers than any given Turing machine using sound reasoning, at least with respect to their creativity. They won't use only sound reasoning, and they have the "game theoretic" privilege to always have the last word. | |
| Oct 3, 2012 at 21:43 | comment | added | Rex Kerr | While I agree with most of your points (+1), I feel compelled to point out that we have no evidence that humans are better theorem-solvers than Turing machines. We have come up with clever ways to solve individual problems (and classes thereof) that would naively be out of reach of a Turing machine, but there is no proof that a Turing machine could not implement the same clever approaches that we use, nor can we demonstrate that we are universal solvers (though it's tempting to assume we are!). | |
| S Oct 2, 2012 at 12:58 | history | edited | Xodarap | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Add examples
|
| S Oct 2, 2012 at 12:58 | history | suggested | Paul Ross | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Pulling out an abbreviation that might not be known (and in any case is probably not correct; the Universal Turing Machine is a general structure!)
|
| Oct 2, 2012 at 11:38 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Oct 2, 2012 at 12:58 | |||||
| Oct 1, 2012 at 14:08 | history | edited | Xodarap | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 42 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2012 at 13:07 | history | answered | Xodarap | CC BY-SA 3.0 |