Article
Version 2
Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed
Rethinking Human and Machine Intelligence through Kant, Wittgenstein, and Gödel
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)
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 new metaphysical framework for distinguishing between human and machine intelligence. By drawing an analogy from Kant’s incongruent counterparts, it posits two deterministic worlds -- one comprising a human agent and the other comprising a machine agent. Using ideas from Wittgenstein and Gödel, the paper defines “deterministic knowledge” and investigates how this knowledge is processed differently in those worlds. By postulating the distinctiveness of human intelligence, this paper addresses what it refers to as “the vantage point problem” – namely, how to make a qualitative distinction between the determinist and the universe where the determinist belongs.
Keywords
ontology; AI; incongruent counterparts; computationalism; emergentism; determinism
Subject
Arts and Humanities, Philosophy
Copyright: This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Comments (3)
We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.
Leave a public commentSend a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Commenter: Jae Lee
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author
Commenter:
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: I am one of the author
Also, in the matin text, I state:
“In other words, no qualitative distinction has been drawn between the act of declaring the universe as deterministic and all the events of the universe that should also comprise the very act of declaration (This is the “vantage point problem.”).”
Perhaps, I should have written “... all the events of the universe that [are to] also comprise the very act of declaration.”
Commenter:
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: I am one of the author
"(1) The act of declaring the universe as deterministic" considered in a philosophical context differs from a trivial event of "(2) the very act of declaration" viewed from a pancomputational perspective.