Michael Chorost has an article at Slate about artificial intelligence and any dangers it might present. I find myself in complete agreement with the early portions of his piece, as he explains why an AI (artificial intelligence) would be unlikely to be dangerous in the way many fear. To value something, an entity has to be able … Continue reading Let artificial intelligence evolve? Probably fruitless, possibly dangerous.
The NY Times has an interesting article about a study which purports to show that literacy may have been far more prevalent in pre-Babylonian exile Judah than many had thought. The implication, it's believed, is that Biblical minimalist scholars who thought that no part of the Bible was composed until after the exile, are wrong. But … Continue reading When were the earliest parts of the Bible written?
I've written before on why science can't determine morality. This isn't a particularly controversial position (even if many of Sam Harris or Michael Shermer's followers find it so). No one seems to have found an intellectually rigorous answer to David Hume's is/ought divide, that you can't derive an ought from an is. To logically determine … Continue reading The unavoidable complexity of morality