AW: [aiethics] What are humans made of?

[Chris Fahey]

Alicebot AI Ethics Committee - http://www.alicebot.org


Kant is about as applicable to the core of this discussion as Galen is =
to
modern medicine. There are countless scientists and philosophers who =
have
built upon the work of Kant in the past 200 years, such that for many
college graduates an argument over "absolute truth" is akin to arguing =
over
whether or not there are four humors. Almost everyone on this list seems =
(to
me) to at the very least pretty well versed in Hegel, Kant, Plato,
Aristotle, etc, as these make up the core of every college level =
philosophy
program. Many more contemporary and more diverse thinkers since then
(Nietzsche, Marx, Godel, Heisenberg, Turing, Foucault, Minsky, Dennett, =
blah
blah blah) have taken this discussion to a new level. Since Kant's time,
mathematics and science have mapped unimaginable new worlds and =
dimensions,
and *that* is the playing field on which this discussion is occurring.

You seem well read and thoughtful for your age, but exceedingly arrogant =
and
condescending. Unless you're reading a dozen (big) books every day and
planning to accept your Nobel Prize this winter, please remember that =
many
of us have been thinking and talking about this stuff for 10 times as =
long
as you have and maybe, just maybe, we're not complete dolts.
In between sips of brandy with your lady friend, that is.

Again, you remind me of myself, age 14, after a particularly embarassing
spout of arrogance: I corrected my science teacher's spelling of =
"ameba",
telling him that "amoeba" was the correct way to spell it. A quick trip =
to
Webster's revealed that "ameba" is a perfectly acceptable way of =
spelling
the word in question. My teacher then removed a card from his desk =
drawer
and handed it to me. It had this written on it:

   Write "A little bit of knowledge=20
   is dangerous." 1,000 times.


-Cf



-Cf