Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #663118 > unrolled thread

Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so? hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-04-28 00:09 +0000
    Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-04-28 08:28 +0200
      Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think,  so? Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2025-04-28 09:59 +0000
        Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 22:02 -0700
    Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think,  so? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-04-28 14:03 -0700

#663118 — Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so?

"I think, therefore I am" ("Cogito, ergo sum" in Latin) is a
foundational
philosophical statement by René Descartes, asserting that the act of
thinking
itself proves the existence of the thinker. Descartes used it as the
basis
for his philosophy, arguing that even if everything else could be
doubted,
the fact that one is doubting proves their existence.

Ask any AI engine this question: Do you think? And all of them will
respond that they don't. That everything they write is based on
algorithms over existing knowledge and that they are not sentient, nor
have consciousness.

It applies equally to Paul Andersen. He shows off about that he thinks
and had deep consciousness, but he is lying. He's a relativistic PARROT,
and I can't find ANY difference between him and a relativistically
biased AI engine.

I wonder if Paul EXISTS or is just a hallucination that lives into an AI
engine, fed with the crappy online history of Paul for the SAD LAST 30
YEARS.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#663121

On 4/28/2025 2:09 AM, rhertz wrote:
 > "I think, therefore I am" ("Cogito, ergo sum" in Latin) is a
 > foundational
 > philosophical statement by René Descartes, asserting that the act of
 > thinking
 > itself proves the existence of the thinker. Descartes used it as the
 > basis
 > for his philosophy, arguing that even if everything else could be
 > doubted,
 > the fact that one is doubting proves their existence.

Existence i.e. - what?
Something exists when we apply the word
"exist" to it. That's all.


 >
 > Ask any AI engine this question: Do you think? And all of them will
 > respond that they don't.

Maybe they're mistaken?

 > That everything they write is based on
 > algorithms over existing knowledge

Most humans manage no better.


 >
 > It applies equally to Paul Andersen. He shows off about that he thinks
 > and had deep consciousness, but he is lying. He's a relativistic PARROT,
 > and I can't find ANY difference between him and a relativistically
 > biased AI engine.

AI doesn't insult, AFAIK.


 > I wonder if Paul EXISTS

No you don't.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663126 — Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so?

Le 28/04/2025 à 08:28, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
> On 4/28/2025 2:09 AM, rhertz wrote:
>  > "I think, therefore I am" ("Cogito, ergo sum" in Latin) is a
>  > foundational
>  > philosophical statement by René Descartes, asserting that the act of
>  > thinking
>  > itself proves the existence of the thinker. Descartes used it as the
>  > basis
>  > for his philosophy, arguing that even if everything else could be
>  > doubted,
>  > the fact that one is doubting proves their existence.
> 
> Existence i.e. - what?
> Something exists when we apply the word
> "exist" to it. That's all.
> 
> 
>  >
>  > Ask any AI engine this question: Do you think? And all of them will
>  > respond that they don't.
> 
> Maybe they're mistaken?
> 
>  > That everything they write is based on
>  > algorithms over existing knowledge
> 
> Most humans manage no better.
> 
> 
>  >
>  > It applies equally to Paul Andersen. He shows off about that he thinks
>  > and had deep consciousness, but he is lying. He's a relativistic PARROT,
>  > and I can't find ANY difference between him and a relativistically
>  > biased AI engine.
> 
> AI doesn't insult, AFAIK.
> 
> 
>  > I wonder if Paul EXISTS
> 
> No you don't.

Descartes's opening sentences are magnificent and very well written.
Then he goes completely off the rails with his "evil genius who deceives 
us." He manages to twist idealist ideology (he would be violently 
criticized by Blaise Pascal and Georges Berkeley) with a grotesque sleight 
of hand that contrasts with the quality of the beginning of his 
exposition. From then on, everything descends into horror. His text no 
longer has any philosophical or theological interest. He defends the idea 
of ​​a God, but a phony God, who gives the world a materialistic slap 
and thus lets it spin without him.

R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663156

On 04/28/2025 02:59 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 28/04/2025 à 08:28, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
>> On 4/28/2025 2:09 AM, rhertz wrote:
>>  > "I think, therefore I am" ("Cogito, ergo sum" in Latin) is a
>>  > foundational
>>  > philosophical statement by René Descartes, asserting that the act of
>>  > thinking
>>  > itself proves the existence of the thinker. Descartes used it as the
>>  > basis
>>  > for his philosophy, arguing that even if everything else could be
>>  > doubted,
>>  > the fact that one is doubting proves their existence.
>>
>> Existence i.e. - what?
>> Something exists when we apply the word
>> "exist" to it. That's all.
>>
>>
>>  >
>>  > Ask any AI engine this question: Do you think? And all of them will
>>  > respond that they don't.
>>
>> Maybe they're mistaken?
>>
>>  > That everything they write is based on
>>  > algorithms over existing knowledge
>>
>> Most humans manage no better.
>>
>>
>>  >
>>  > It applies equally to Paul Andersen. He shows off about that he thinks
>>  > and had deep consciousness, but he is lying. He's a relativistic
>> PARROT,
>>  > and I can't find ANY difference between him and a relativistically
>>  > biased AI engine.
>>
>> AI doesn't insult, AFAIK.
>>
>>
>>  > I wonder if Paul EXISTS
>>
>> No you don't.
>
> Descartes's opening sentences are magnificent and very well written.
> Then he goes completely off the rails with his "evil genius who deceives
> us." He manages to twist idealist ideology (he would be violently
> criticized by Blaise Pascal and Georges Berkeley) with a grotesque
> sleight of hand that contrasts with the quality of the beginning of his
> exposition. From then on, everything descends into horror. His text no
> longer has any philosophical or theological interest. He defends the
> idea of ​​a God, but a phony God, who gives the world a materialistic
> slap and thus lets it spin without him.
>
> R.H.

If you read "On Truth and Error" you may be disabused of that notion.

Pascal, the jansenist, while Berkeley's a satirist, ...,
either isn't much both rationalist and idealist.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663141 — Re: Descartes; Cogito, ergo sum. Any AI and Paul Andersen: I don't think, so?

rhertz wrote:
> 
> "I think, therefore I am" ("Cogito, ergo sum" in Latin) is a
> foundational
> philosophical statement by René Descartes, 

I don't see much edvience of any 'thinking' here...


"...therefore they are not."









-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web