Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Ten questions about the hard limits of human intelligence

#1
C C Offline
https://aeon.co/essays/ten-questions-abo...telligence

INTRO (David H. Wolpert): Despite his many intellectual achievements, I suspect there are some concepts my dog cannot conceive of, or even contemplate. He can sit on command and fetch a ball, but I suspect that he cannot imagine that the metal can containing his food is made from processed rocks. I suspect he cannot imagine that the slowly lengthening white lines in the sky are produced by machines also made from rocks like his cans of dog food. I suspect he cannot imagine that these flying repurposed dog food cans in the sky look so small only because they are so high up.

And I wonder: is there any way that my dog could know that these ideas even exist? It doesn’t take long for this question to spread elsewhere. Soon I start to wonder about concepts that I don’t know exist: concepts whose existence I can never even suspect, let alone contemplate. What can I ever know about that which lies beyond the limits of what I can even imagine?

Attempting to answer this question only leads us to more questions. In this essay, I’m going to run through a sequence of 10 queries that provide insight into how we might begin conceiving of what’s at stake in such a question and how to answer it – and there is much at stake. The question of what we can know of that which lies beyond the limits of our imagination is partially about the biological function of intelligence, and partially about our greatest cognitive prostheses, particularly human language and mathematics.

It’s also about the possibility of a physical reality that far exceeds our own, or endless simulated realities running in the computers of advanced nonhuman lifeforms. And it’s about our technological progeny, those ‘children’ who will one day cognitively eclipse us.

From the perspective of my 10 queries, human exceptionalism becomes very shaky. Perhaps we are more like dogs (or single-celled paramecia) than we’d care to admit. Though human history is filled with rhapsodic testimony to human ingenuity and intelligence, this sequence of questions paints a different picture: I want to emphasise how horribly, and perhaps horrifyingly, limited and limiting our achievements are – our language, science, and mathematics.

And so, the first question in the sequence is simple... (MORE - details)

COVERED:

1. On some ill-defined objective scale, are we smart or are we stupid?

2. Why does there appear to be a major chasm between the cognitive capabilities of our hominin ancestors and the cognitive capabilities of modern scientists, artists and philosophers?

3. Even aided by our extended minds, can we ever create entirely new forms of science and mathematics that could access aspects of physical reality beyond our conception, or are we forever limited to merely developing the forms we already have?

4. Is it possible for an entity that exists only in a computer simulation to run an accurate computer simulation of the ‘higher’ entity that simulated them?

5. Does the form, rather than the content, of our science and mathematics suggest that the cognitive abilities of humans are also severely constrained?

6. Are these finite strings of symbol sequences – the form of our mathematics and languages – necessary features of physical reality, or do they instead reflect the limits of our ability to formalise aspects of reality?

7. How would our perception of reality change if human mathematics were expanded to include infinite strings of symbol sequences?

8. Is it a lucky coincidence that mathematical and physical reality can be formulated in terms of our current cognitive abilities, or is it just that, tautologically, we cannot conceive of any aspects of mathematical and physical reality that cannot be formulated in terms of our cognitive capabilities?

9. Just as the notion of a question is forever beyond a paramecium, are there cognitive constructs that are necessary for understanding physical reality, but that remain unimaginable due to the limitations of our brains?

10. Is there any way that we could imagine testing whether our future science and mathematics can fully capture physical reality?
Reply
#2
Zinjanthropos Offline
Lot of questions over my head. Speaking of limits, I always wondered how so little matter, like that which composes our brain, can conceptualize and learn.

Did we hit a certain low point and one day become intelligent? I look at humans at pathetically weak creatures physically and maybe there’s an advantage there. Have to wonder how we made it past a gauntlet of predators. Perhaps being so feeble and defenceless puts a brain on track towards becoming intelligent. A certain level of defencelessness is the key to becoming intelligent, idk.

Anyways I like the Information Theory of the Universe but I’m not endorsing it. The fact that ‘alive’ may mean I consist of information or we are a simulation of some computer, man made or otherwise, is intriguing to me.

https://www.space.com/29477-did-informat...osmos.html
Reply
#3
Magical Realist Offline
Quote:8. Is it a lucky coincidence that mathematical and physical reality can be formulated in terms of our current cognitive abilities, or is it just that, tautologically, we cannot conceive of any aspects of mathematical and physical reality that cannot be formulated in terms of our cognitive capabilities?

I think the latter is true. That we experience reality in terms of our own logic and values and cognitive limitations. This is the subjective side of consciousness that enables the projection of various qualia such as colors and shapes and textures as a static and independent reality. We project our own mental phenomena upon the physical realm we find ourselves surrounded by. But in fact what is independent and purely objective about the world doesn't enter our experience. It is transcendental and forever stands apart from our experience. It is the noumenal aspect of Being that escapes us as we embellish its bland grey surfaces with the properties of our own cerebral generation. It is not the information itself that we gather from our experience but the infinite source of the information and what the information is about.

"If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro' narrow chinks of his cavern.“--William Blake
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Quantum mechanics, the Chinese room and the limits of understanding C C 7 99 Mar 8, 2024 06:36 PM
Last Post: C C
  Is the Hard Problem of consciousness really so hard? C C 2 120 Oct 27, 2023 02:56 PM
Last Post: confused2
  The hard problems of vegetarianism C C 5 239 May 10, 2021 12:28 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Ten Alternatives To Evolution C C 1 662 Nov 5, 2015 06:11 PM
Last Post: Yazata



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)