Artificial intelligence algorithms, fueled by continuous technological development and increased computing power, have proven effective across a variety of tasks. Concurrently, quantum computers have shown promise in solving problems beyond the reach of classical computers. These advancements have contributed to a misconception that quantum computers enable hypercomputation, sparking speculation about quantum supremacy leading to an intelligence explosion and the creation of superintelligent agents. We challenge this notion, arguing that current evidence does not support the idea that quantum technologies enable hypercomputation. (...) Fundamental limitations on information storage within finite spaces and the accessibility of information from quantum states constrain quantum computers from surpassing the Turing computing barrier. While quantum technologies may offer exponential speed-ups in specific computing cases, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that focusing solely on quantum-related problems will lead to technological singularity and the emergence of superintelligence. Subsequently, there is no premise suggesting that general intelligence depends on quantum effects or that accelerating existing algorithms through quantum means will replicate true intelligence. We propose that if superintelligence is to be achieved, it will not be solely through quantum technologies. Instead, the attainment of superintelligence remains a conceptual challenge that humanity has yet to overcome, with quantum technologies showing no clear path toward its resolution. (shrink)

Peter Carruthers argues that the global workspace theory implies there are no facts of the matter about animal consciousness. The argument is easily extended to other cognitive theories of consciousness, posing a general problem for consciousness studies. But the argument proves too much, for it also implies that there are no facts of the matter about human consciousness. A key assumption of the argument is that scientific theories of consciousness must explain away the explanatory gap. I criticize this assumption and (...) point to an alternative strategy for defending scientific theories of consciousness, one that better reflects the ongoing scientific practice. I argue there are introspectable inferential connections from phenomenal concepts to functional concepts that scientists can use to individuate the global workspace in terms of capacities that animals and humans share. (shrink)

“복합교육” 은 모랭의 “복잡성 사유”를 주제의식으로 삼고 바디우의 (공백·순수다수) 존재론에 정초한 교육이다. 복합교육은“복합증명윤리론”의 개념을 통해인간 정신의 본성이 실천되는 양상으로 나타난다. 다학문적·다차원적·복합적·복수적인 모랭의 복잡성 사유 개념은, 바디우가 존재론을 집합론으로 선언한 얼개를 바탕으로 이론적 정당성과 실천적 당위성이 확보된다. 즉 복잡성 사유는 존재의 가장본질적 모습인 공백의 바디우 존재론에 의해 논의되어야 한다. 왜냐하면 복잡성 자체(complexity itself)가 단순화 패러다임에 의해 정의·설명·규정되는 우(愚)를 피해야 하기 때문이다. 이런 점의 실천성에 관하여 본 연구는 “순환파생운동”이라는 복잡성존재론에관해 논한다. 그 운동은 무한한 속성을 지닌──힐베르트 무한 호텔로 예증이 가능한──인간 본성의 정신 환경에서, (...) “공백의 존재론적 특징”과 “일차상황부터메타구조(멱집합적상황상태) 자체” 까지 “복합증명식운동”으로 복잡성이 실현되어가는 양상의 개념이다. 복잡성 사유가 순환파생운동으로 실천될 때, 가장 먼저 정신의 내면에서 “자기예속화”에 대한 반성이 이루어진다. 그러한 반성(자기비판성)을 기초로 “건설적 합리성”이 정신 환경에 구축된다. 그러한 구축은 복합교육으로더욱 심화·확장된다. 이런 복합교육적심화·확장은 윤리적 실천(복합증명 윤리론)을 도모하는 양성 피드백작용으로 사회문화로 파급된다. 복합증명윤리론의 순환파생운동은 공백의 창발적 성찰과 기존상황의재성찰(반성)이 메타구조화를 통해 현시된다. 그러한 현시적 상황상태에서바디우의 “사건”은 창발된다. 바디우는 사건을 통해서만 “진리”와 “주체”가 형성된다고 말한다. 이는 집합론에서부분집합이 생성되는 “선험적 조건에 관한 음함수적 논리”에 의해, “위상학의 연속함수와 역함수로 전단사(일대일대응)의 내적 관계”가 형성되는 과정으로 증명된다. 복합증명은연역적 증명의 “우연적(일자가 아닌 순수 다수의 강제성)” 후(後)사건성의 장(field)에서 실행된다. 본 연구에서 그러한 실천성을 “시험문제를 복합증명하는 학생” 프로젝트로 제안한다. “학생”이 시험을 치룬 후, 그 시험문제를 직접 파악하고 증명하는 절차(후사건에서의 우연·다수·멱의 진리)를 강제하는 프로젝트다. 그 프로젝트는 시험문제상황이학생에 의해 순환파생운동으로 파급되면서, 새로운질서를 창발하는 사건을 일으키는 것을 목적으로 한다. 그 목적에 따라 학생은 새로운(메타존재론적) “진리질서” 를 창안한다. 이러한 진리를 충실히 실천하면서, 학생은 비로소 “주체”의 위상을 획득한다. 결론적으로, 현교육은 복합교육을통해서“인간이 다른 동물과 다른 점은 바로 이런 물음을 스스로 던지고 성찰하는 자세”라는 점을 학생 스스로가 주체적으로 보여줄 수 있게 해주는 윤리적 덕목을 실현할수 있는 장(field)을 마련하도록 최선을 다해야 한다. (shrink)

Broadly speaking, transhumanism is a movement seeking to advance the cause of post-humanity. It advocates using science and technology for a reconstruction of the human condition sufficiently radical to call into question the appropriateness of calling it “human” anymore. While there is not universal agreement among transhumanists as to the best path to this goal, the general outline is clear enough. Advances in genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, robotics and nanotechnology will make possible the achievement of the Baconian vision of “the (...) relief of man’s estate,” as they allow us to conquer disease, eliminate unhappiness, end scarcity and postpone, perhaps indefinitely, death itself. But fulfilling such long-standing dreams is only the beginning of what our new powers will make possible. Left to itself, the present trajectory of technological development necessarily aims at a future incomprehensible to beings such as we are – at no distant date an evolutionary leap in the way intelligence is embodied, and what it can accomplish. Transhumanism seeks to make sure no atavistic scruple obstructs this momentum, and to maximize its benefits and minimize its admitted risks. While there is no lack of illuminating print works advocating transhumanism, that its public face should be on the World Wide Web is as much a matter of course as once would have been the use by similar movements of the printed broadside or the public lecture. On the websites of the World Transhumanist Association (www. transhumanism.org) and the Extropy Institute (www.extropy. org) – premier among transhumanism’s many organizations – one finds authoritative statements explaining and justifying the transhumanist project. If transhumanism were primarily an academic school or a professional association, it would not be entirely fair to turn to these admittedly popular presentations for a critical look at the transhumanist vision. But as these are the documents by which transhumanism presents itself to the public as a movement, and through which it hopes to gain adherents, it is legitimate to make.... (shrink)

Quantum mechanics supersedes classical mechanics, and social science, some argue, should be responsive to this change. This paper finds that two rather different arguments are currently being used to argue that quantum mechanics is epistemically relevant in social science. One, attributed to Alexander Wendt, appeals to the presence of quantum physical effects in the social world. The other, attributed to Karen Barad, insists on the importance of quantum metaphysics even when quantum effects are negligible. Neither argument, however, is sound. Consequently, (...) the paper concludes that neither of them offers compelling arguments for the view that quantum mechanics has epistemic relevance for social science. (shrink)

Process aspects are prevalent in many domains of reality, and consciousness is no exception. Nevertheless, while the processual approach implicitly underlies the theories of consciousness, an explicit statement of the question is scarcely found in the literature. This paper tries to bridge this gap. Here, I argue that conscious experience fulfils all the requirements for a processual analysis: it is complex, functionally/causally determined, and has a temporal basis. Then, I revisit an old concept, self-transformative processes, which refers to processes that (...) change themselves. These processes are very common. A stretched bow is the classical Heraclitean example. However, it is easy to misunderstand what self-transformativeness is. To provide a well-formed description, I characterize self-transformative processes in terms of composition (using a non-classic mereology) and in terms of functionality (by developing the concept of self-modulating variables). Finally, I apply self-transformative processes to explain consciousness. Traces of self-transformativeness can be found in many theories of consciousness, particularly when they are stressed about their internal mechanisms. Here, I focus on Integrated Information Theory as a paradigmatic example of a mathematically well-described theory, and I demonstrate that quantitative self-transformativeness is a requirement at the very core of the integration of the information. (shrink)

advocating the use of biotechnology to abolish suffering throughout the living world. At that time, Nick was a philosophy postgrad in London. He read the manifesto and fired off several incisive questions. Later we met up. I harangued Nick into getting a website. Nick then sounded me out about setting up a kind of umbrella organization for transhumanists - and overcame my doubts about whether overcoming suffering is really at the heart of a transhumanist agenda.