| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« making sense of oppenheimer | Main | Unfortunately, it was paradise »

November 18, 2012

Ray Kurzweil’s Dubious New Theory of Mind

From The New Yorker:

Ray-kurzweilRay Kurzweil is, by all accounts, a genius. He holds nineteen honorary doctorates, has founded a half-dozen successful companies, and was a major contributor to the field of artificial intelligence. He built some of the first practical systems for recognizing speech and scanning text. Time magazine recently featured Kurzweil on its cover, and Fortune described him as “a legendary inventor with a history of mind-blowing ideas.” And now he has a new book, with a subtitle that suggests he has found another such idea: “How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed.” In the preface to the book Kurzweil argues, with good reason, that “reverse-engineering the human brain may be regarded as the most important project in the universe.” He then presents a theory he calls “the pattern recognition theory of mind (PRTM)” which he claims “describes the basic algorithm of the neocortex (the region of the brain responsible for perception, memory, and critical thinking).” Kurzweil suggests that his conclusions are “inescapable” and that the principles he espouses can be used “to vastly extend the power of our own intelligence.” That would be big news. But does the book deliver? Kurzweil’s critics have not always been kind; the biologist PZ Myers once wrote, “Ray Kurzweil is a genius. One of the greatest hucksters of the age.” Doug Hofstadter, the Pulitzer Prize winning author of “Gödel, Escher, Bach” has been even harsher, saying once in an interview that “if you read Ray Kurzweil’s books … what I find is that it’s a very bizarre mixture of ideas that are solid and good with ideas that are crazy. It’s as if you took a lot of very good food and some dog excrement and blended it all up so that you can’t possibly figure out what’s good or bad.”

Which Kurzweil shows up to explain the mind? The brilliant inventor and autodidact or the man who has written one book on diets and another on immortality?

More here.

Posted by Azra Raza at 05:30 AM | Permalink

Comments

In the preface to the book Kurzweil argues, with good reason, that “reverse-engineering the human brain may be regarded as the most important project in the universe.”

There is some evidence that "artificial intelligence", i.e. abiotic intelligence preceded human and other biotic intelligence.

Of course semantics comes into play, because there is ongoing debate as to what "intelligence" is, so axiomatically there is debate about what "artificial intelligence" is.

If one does not know what intelligence is, one cannot produce an artificial copy, i.e. an artificial implementation of it.

Posted by: Dredd | Nov 18, 2012 8:54:24 AM

I want Ray Kurzweil to write a program to predict the creation of Man Ray's the Gift--or even explain what it means. He must have forgotten the Theory of Computability. Not all problems can be quantified--not all properties reveal their meaning through their metrics. No electrical circuit will ever 'be'. We've been suckered by clever Science Fiction. And anyway, why engineer an artificial human mind to begin with. Why not use the machine to ease the labor of existing human minds, and to extend our senses beyond their limitations. For all his efforts at model building, Ray Kurzweil's mind seems to lack the attribute of wisdom. Ray Kurzweil longs to be the Demiurge--and put a machine Adam in an electronic Garden of Eden. And all true Gnostics know how misguided this is...

Posted by: c4Logic | Nov 18, 2012 9:38:18 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

rafiq on Tuesday Poem

Raza Husain on the culture animal

Nebor on Tuesday Poem

Eleutheria on I am dust and ashes and full of sin

carlos on I am dust and ashes and full of sin

Joe on the culture animal

Sundar on the culture animal

Eleutheria on Positive Failure - a review of "The Power" by Rhonda Byrne

Eleutheria on Positive Failure - a review of "The Power" by Rhonda Byrne

Matt on The Science Mystique

Eleutheria on Why is Europe so Messed Up? An Illuminating History

Elatia Harris on I am dust and ashes and full of sin

PeteChapman on I am dust and ashes and full of sin

Raza Husain on the culture animal

Chris on Positive Failure - a review of "The Power" by Rhonda Byrne

DAS on Why is Europe so Messed Up? An Illuminating History

DAS on Is the Brain No Different From a Light Switch? The Uncomfortable Ideas of the Philosopher Daniel Dennett

DAS on the culture animal

Raza Husain on Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers

Dredd on NORTH KOREA’S NERVE WAR

Dredd on Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers

Raza Husain on Is the Brain No Different From a Light Switch? The Uncomfortable Ideas of the Philosopher Daniel Dennett

Dana on germ houses

musafir on Tuesday Poem

soubriquet on Tuesday Poem

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed