Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
Preprint Article Version 3 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Rethinking Human and Machine Intelligence through Kant’s Incongruent Counterparts

Version 1 : Received: 13 October 2023 / Approved: 13 October 2023 / Online: 13 October 2023 (11:37:25 CEST)
Version 2 : Received: 26 October 2023 / Approved: 26 October 2023 / Online: 26 October 2023 (11:30:49 CEST)
Version 3 : Received: 5 December 2023 / Approved: 6 December 2023 / Online: 6 December 2023 (09:20:28 CET)
Version 4 : Received: 4 July 2024 / Approved: 4 July 2024 / Online: 5 July 2024 (02:49:50 CEST)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Jeong, L. J. Rethinking Human and Machine Intelligence through Kant, Wittgenstein, Gödel, and Cantor. Jeong, L. J. Rethinking Human and Machine Intelligence through Kant, Wittgenstein, Gödel, and Cantor.

Abstract

This paper proposes a metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine intelligence. By drawing an analogy from Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it posits two identical deterministic worlds -- one comprising a human agent and the other comprising a machine agent. These agents exhibit different types of information processing mechanisms despite their apparent sameness in a causal sense. By postulating the distinctiveness of human over machine intelligence, this paper resolves what it refers to as “the vantage point problem” – namely, how to legitimize a determinist’s assertion of determinism by placing the determinist within the universe.

Keywords

determinism; incongruent counterparts; simulation; state description; counterfactuals

Subject

Arts and Humanities, Philosophy

Comments (1)

Comment 1
Received: 6 December 2023
Commenter: Jae Lee
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author
Comment: The 'vantage point problem' stated in the abstract and introduction has been further clarified. Additionally, I excluded the application of Gödel's proof strategy for his incompleteness theorem from the paper. Accordingly, I had to change the title as well. The existing term 'metaphysically open deterministic world' has been changed to 'deterministic world' for simplicity. Furthermore, I have cited two new thinkers, Piccinini and Zizek, to support my arguments. 
+ Respond to this comment

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 1
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.