Can a matrix solver think? X users clash over reductionist AI arguments
burny_tech · x · 2026-09-28
gregtravis argues that claiming a matrix algebra solver can think is unscientific since no rigorous definition of thinking exists. burnytech counters that complex systems can be analyzed at other layers of abstraction, noting the reductionist logic would equally dismiss electrochemical signals as capable of thought. A concise round in the ongoing debate over AI and the definition of thinking.
More from AGI Musings
- Critic says AI doom rhetoric is an aesthetic choice, not persuasion — trevposts · 2026-09-28
- Inner and outer alignment have shifted from theory to live empirical science — jam3scampbell · 2026-09-28
- François Chollet: AI industry should build tools for humans, not a 'successor species' — fchollet · 2026-09-28
- Next Token Podcast #004: Opus 5.5 Enters Video, Muse Goes Viral, and China's AI PM Debate — oran_ge · 2026-09-28
- Stanford study: GPT-4 alone outdiagnoses doctors using GPT-4 — jonc101x · 2026-09-28
- Meta's TRIBE v2: Tri-modal foundation model predicts human brain activity from 1,000+ hours of fMRI — burny_tech · 2026-09-28