Keep reading for FREE
It’s like defining something. A definition is never complete, just contextual.
When we define something, it must involve all the possibilities that exist.
Example: what is philosophy? Love of wisdom? Contextually correct but not 100% correct. How?
Defining what philosophy is, in a perfect way, must be clarified 100%.
That means, philosophy is:
That’s how it should define something perfectly. All possibilities must be ascertained.
If so, then we can never define precisely? Yes!
Similarly when someone claims that his reasoning system is complete? It can’t be?
That any reasoning formula that has been successfully programmed into a computer to be able to simulate artificial intelligence to match humans? Again, it can’t be. Helping humans? Yes it’s possible, but conquer human? Nope.
Because the reasoning formula of any logical system is like defining reality in a narrow way. So only have a limited point of view.
Then, how can artificial intelligence be able to dynamically approach human analysis? HOW MUCH MORE FORMULA IS NEEDED? OR IS THERE A SINGLE FORMULA?
THERE IS NO SINGLE FORMULA! So how many formulas do you need? IT NEEDS AS MANY DIMENSIONS OF TRUTH & DETAILS. WHAT? ️
Yes, it takes trillions trillions trillions of logical systems beyond all of them.
Beyond Aristotelian logic, induced logic, what else? Beyond symbolic logic? Beyond “Sequent Calculus” Logic? Beyond what’s more? Beyond Boolean logic, Venn diagram logic, tautology? YES, YES & YES!
Then how can we do it? If viewed from the singularity, there is indeed a single system, namely the axiomatic system, but how many axioms involved? As many facts as there are. What does that mean?
Every axiomatic truth is actually a logical system. So how many items of the reasoning formula are there? As many as axiomatic truth about anything that exist - happening.
SO WHAT KIND OF THE SIMPLE LANGUAGE, PATTERNS OR THE MOST ADVANCED REASONING SYSTEM CAN WE USE? HEHEHE …
Just one, CONTINUOUSLY SUPPLYING AXIOMS,
INJECTING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITH AXIOMATIC TRUTH.
Then does that mean we never thinking at all? Yes.
So the best we can do? By not thinking. But imagining - deep empathy, so that suddenly we will downloading axioms. This is where animal unable to do it
Remember, formula is just narrowing our point of view. So to liberate our point of view, by rejecting all formulas and accept quanta truth of all possibles that exist
So, the future of artificial intelligence?
No longer needed: RNN, Transformer, Bayesian, Aristotle Logic System, Sequent Logic, and so forth.
However, artificial intelligence relies entirely on axiom data as much as the problem at hand, or if not? Then the simulation of intuition will always be impossible, and? Don't expect artificial intelligence to be able to philosophize, except just predicting.
No axiomatic data supply? Artificial intelligence is only able to generalize statistically, not generalizations as they are.
No axiomatic data supply? AI is only able to see reality incompletely.
reading habits, gather your
remember what you readand stay ahead of the crowd!
Save time with daily digests
No ads, all content is free
Save ideas & add your own
Get access to the mobile app
4.7 App Rating
IN GOD WE TRUST I am free not because i have choices, but i am free because i rely on God with quality assured
The Future of Artificial Intelligence
MORE LIKE THIS