>>17417551
>saying the brain does not neatly align with this hyper-abstract model of computation through objective evidence is magical thinking
lol just give up little buddy. Lemme summarize the main arguments of the article I linked you:

>Turing machines in the classical sense work on one discrete task at a time
>brains work via graded activation levels i.e. non-discrete, instead works mostly parallel WITH NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS
>mathematical operations in brains don't quite work the same as numeric computational algorithms; one can oftentimes "feel" or intuit whether a number is bigger or smaller than another one without needing to count

The thesis concludes that a brain is not *likely* a turing machine, though some mechanisms have been likened to it (such as a single processor in the brain, though it remains unknown what said processor is).

Back | Go to board

Board:

/his/

Thread:

Who had the best refutation for the mind-body problem? Is consciousness and the self an illusion and we're all just puppets tricked into…

Who had the best refutation for the mind-body problem?
Is consciousness and the self an illusion and we're all just puppets tricked into…