Merged Is Scientism Really Justified?

[steenkh]

The focus should always be on the content, not the messenger!

Of course, but what do you do when the content has already been addressed many times, nd the messenger just repeats it without addressing anything that has been said?

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Of course, but what do you do when the content has already been addressed many times, nd the messenger just repeats it without addressing anything that has been said?

Start reporting the disruptive spamming?

 

[Thermal]

Start reporting the disruptive spamming?

[OPmode] I'm sorry, P.J., I'm afraid I can't let you do that.[/OPmode]

 

[JayUtah]

the mathematical truth that $2 + 2 = 4$ is intrinsic and independent of who uttered it.

Copy-pasted Google AI math again.

 

[theprestige]

In philosophy and logic, there is a fundamental principle called the separation between origin and validity (or the rejection of the genetic fallacy). It doesn't matter if a statement was uttered by Albert Einstein, a 5-year-old child, a parrot, or generated by an artificial intelligence: the mathematical truth that $2 + 2 = 4$ is intrinsic and independent of who uttered it.

The value of an argument lies in its internal coherence, its premises, and its logic, not in the badge of the person who wrote it. When people in forums ignore the mathematics or the logic of a statement just to attack its supposed "origin" (accusing it of being AI), they commit a basic error in reasoning. The focus should always be on the content, not the messenger!

You're not making an argument. You're asking a question that's already been asked and answered at length.

Why would I want to reconsider questions from a stupid machine that can't even remember that it already asked the question, and can't even remember that it's already been answered?

Why haven't you noticed that your AI keeps asking the same questions over and over?

Why haven't you noticed that your AI can't remember the answers, or advance the discussion based on on those answers?

Why haven't you noticed that your AI keeps getting stuck on the very first round of discussion, and keeps having to reset?

This is why I don't like to consider propositions from AI. It's clearly not fit to have a human conversation, with other humans, about human ideas.

And it seems you're not even interested in a human conversation. You've taken every attempt at human engagement and repaid it with brain dead clanker slop. Binary bull ◊◊◊◊. Robot refuse. Digital duck all. Nonhuman night soil.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Copy-pasted Google AI math again.

At least it didn't mistake pressure for impact force.