[lit-ideas] Plato's Mistake
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 10:57:42 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 9/4/2013 1:08:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wokshevs@xxxxxx writes:
My theory of choice is that machines can't think
because they are incapable of making a mistake. The true mark of thought
on this
view is fallibility and machines ain't got it. Machines can be
dysfunctional or
broken, but they are incapable of making a mistake. Hence they cannot
think.
---
R. Paul was elaborating on what counts as a 'mistake'.
Oddly, Austin speaks of 'uptake', which is similar, only opposite.
When discussing things like
"I hereby do marry you" (he later found out matrimony is not performative
in Syria)
or -- a better example of his, "I bet you $5 she's not in" --
there is a need for 'uptake', i.e. understanding.
Similarly, then, mistake is misunderstanding.
---
It may be argued that etymologically, a mistake is STILL a 'take'.
'mistake' seems 'value-oriented' in that Walter O. is right that there is
an element of rule-following that computers can do but won't.
-- or perhaps may not do yet will.
Or something.
Cheers,
Speranza
----
* I'm reading a book on the history of cabaret and find a reference to a
New York venue, "Plato's retreat" -- hence the title.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Plato's Mistake - Jlsperanza
