This thread is an amazing one for me, for considerably greater reasons than the somewhat narrower field of hi-fidelity audio it began with.
May I first say that I truly appreciate the way you both think and process debate and argument - mahgister, and andy2 : ) - if you do not mind however, I would like to add to your already well-placed points, to say that it will not be possible to help heaudio123 understand the import of your arguments through the established points you have made so far.
You see, never mind all the advances that has been made with AI and everything else expected of it in the distant future, there is one thing, beyond imagination and inspiration, that separates human beings from every other living species, or intelligence, on earth. This is the ability to believe. Belief, and it’s lesser sibling of self-belief, is something beyond all understanding. In a world where the double helix has been reasonably well unravelled, where AI has taken over functions we could never have believed possible, where preventative measures for the avoidance of cancer is close, where human beings are able to survive for close to two continuous years in a steel tube called a submarine without needing to surface even once - the best minds on earth are no closer than they were a hundred years ago, to understanding the basis for what begins belief; how it becomes strong enough to give reason to keep living; how or why it evolves to create the wondrous built environment; and the circumstances under which it can suddenly collapse, to tragic consequences at times, or to remarkable beginning of even more powerful, new belief. This is truly what separates human existence from everything else. Mind you, this does not begin to touch on collective belief, which is another entirely profound discussion. So, never mind the fact that AI has not been able to replicate belief, the greatest human minds in the world have not even begun to marginally understand what it is, in relation to its mechanisms. This is something no robot, and certainly no AI will never be able to model, let alone replicate - not merely for the simple fact that the very definition of belief is that it CANNOT be replicated. So even if AI could replicate the conditions under which belief happens, evolves, changes, or ends, its very success will guarantee its failure. Belief is subject to nuance which cannot be predicted or anticipated.
And, if we can agree that self-belief is what drives the foundations of any invention, all original creativity, intelligence, and every moment of intangible human passion; then we could well say that AI in all its wonderful character and contribution, is woefully inadequate to even marginally dream of replacing any aspect of what matters most in human existence.
The truth of our human condition is that it is about change, evolution. And this moment of evolution is never scientific - a cell simply decides to break the rules to mutate - evolution is defined by accident, not methodology or preconception, the complete ‘science of known variables’ which I believe is what heaudio123 argues for. Never mind evolution, if too difficult to contemplate, the greatest experiences in our lives happen as result of the unexpected, of result of the accident. The most intelligent people on earth are the ones able to devise a life or work structure within which accidents can and must be allowed to happen, and be brought to awareness, for opportunity to be seen. it is impossible for every single variable surrounding even the smallest issue or ‘thing’ to be observed, collated, and factored for, in any ‘scientific’ method. This is the basic fact that governs ‘intuition’ - the ability to act in spite of not knowing every single fact - it is difficult to even grasp general facts about sound, impossible to fully comprehend the ridiculously complex act of hearing.
So I do not think we are on entirely different sides of a raging river, to be able to understand that science and measurements only take us to a point, after which belief and intuition have to take over, often to hit and miss result, which is not a bad thing, since this structure itself has the unexpected built into it : )
i feel this is the crux of the discussion that has been running for five lovely pages now. And I love most that generally, every participant in the thread has been generally civil, and not too precious about themselves to still engage in some form of exchange. It is refreshing from so many other threads in audiogon that become personally insulting to individuals. Thanks so much for this : ) - kevin
May I first say that I truly appreciate the way you both think and process debate and argument - mahgister, and andy2 : ) - if you do not mind however, I would like to add to your already well-placed points, to say that it will not be possible to help heaudio123 understand the import of your arguments through the established points you have made so far.
You see, never mind all the advances that has been made with AI and everything else expected of it in the distant future, there is one thing, beyond imagination and inspiration, that separates human beings from every other living species, or intelligence, on earth. This is the ability to believe. Belief, and it’s lesser sibling of self-belief, is something beyond all understanding. In a world where the double helix has been reasonably well unravelled, where AI has taken over functions we could never have believed possible, where preventative measures for the avoidance of cancer is close, where human beings are able to survive for close to two continuous years in a steel tube called a submarine without needing to surface even once - the best minds on earth are no closer than they were a hundred years ago, to understanding the basis for what begins belief; how it becomes strong enough to give reason to keep living; how or why it evolves to create the wondrous built environment; and the circumstances under which it can suddenly collapse, to tragic consequences at times, or to remarkable beginning of even more powerful, new belief. This is truly what separates human existence from everything else. Mind you, this does not begin to touch on collective belief, which is another entirely profound discussion. So, never mind the fact that AI has not been able to replicate belief, the greatest human minds in the world have not even begun to marginally understand what it is, in relation to its mechanisms. This is something no robot, and certainly no AI will never be able to model, let alone replicate - not merely for the simple fact that the very definition of belief is that it CANNOT be replicated. So even if AI could replicate the conditions under which belief happens, evolves, changes, or ends, its very success will guarantee its failure. Belief is subject to nuance which cannot be predicted or anticipated.
And, if we can agree that self-belief is what drives the foundations of any invention, all original creativity, intelligence, and every moment of intangible human passion; then we could well say that AI in all its wonderful character and contribution, is woefully inadequate to even marginally dream of replacing any aspect of what matters most in human existence.
The truth of our human condition is that it is about change, evolution. And this moment of evolution is never scientific - a cell simply decides to break the rules to mutate - evolution is defined by accident, not methodology or preconception, the complete ‘science of known variables’ which I believe is what heaudio123 argues for. Never mind evolution, if too difficult to contemplate, the greatest experiences in our lives happen as result of the unexpected, of result of the accident. The most intelligent people on earth are the ones able to devise a life or work structure within which accidents can and must be allowed to happen, and be brought to awareness, for opportunity to be seen. it is impossible for every single variable surrounding even the smallest issue or ‘thing’ to be observed, collated, and factored for, in any ‘scientific’ method. This is the basic fact that governs ‘intuition’ - the ability to act in spite of not knowing every single fact - it is difficult to even grasp general facts about sound, impossible to fully comprehend the ridiculously complex act of hearing.
So I do not think we are on entirely different sides of a raging river, to be able to understand that science and measurements only take us to a point, after which belief and intuition have to take over, often to hit and miss result, which is not a bad thing, since this structure itself has the unexpected built into it : )
i feel this is the crux of the discussion that has been running for five lovely pages now. And I love most that generally, every participant in the thread has been generally civil, and not too precious about themselves to still engage in some form of exchange. It is refreshing from so many other threads in audiogon that become personally insulting to individuals. Thanks so much for this : ) - kevin