donny.nyc/unprompted
1
0
Fork 0
Code Actions Releases Activity

[notes] happy idiots
All checks were successful
Deploy to S3 / deploy (push) Successful in 1m45s
Details

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Stephen Donahue
2026-04-20 03:56:36 +00:00
parent 32b2d055f2
commit 234f3697f6
5 changed files with 199 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

22
Notes/do-people-think.md
View File

@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ permalink: /columns/2026/do-people-think/
- Bottling it within youself, just as senses, impressions without a voice, with no expression or transformation
- We form groups, we organize, and we process together. That's thinking
## Quotes
> "[he thinks] that the idealistic creations of his mind... also represent reality." - Claude Bernard
@@ -54,6 +55,27 @@ permalink: /columns/2026/do-people-think/
- Is "thinking" in isolation really thinking? Or, is thinking in a social / anthropological sense a connector?
- Do machines Think?
- Yes
- True thought has structure, a sequence, clear logical steps.
- It is neither random nor unpredictable. It follows clear, irrefutable logic.
- Anything else is noise
- No
- Machines are bound by rules. They can only follow a pre-programmed sequence of steps
- The sequence may have rich variety, but lacks in originality.
- Thinking is about novelty. Making leaps of intuition and instinct.
- If we can pave the way between with logic or reasoning, that's nice, but not essential.
- I reject this approach as flawed, lacking both nuance and merit.
- Total aside: the point shouldn't be to subscribe absolutely to one side or the other, and claim it the undeniable truth.
- These are devices, anchor points around which we can scaffold our reasoning, and draw tighter bounds around the concept being examined.
- They themselves are not to be confused with the subject at hand.
- by extension, we won't say that one or the other, both or neither are the thing itself.
- Like confusing the map for the terrain.
- these are navigational aids
- So probably not a single definition of thinking
- there's the intuitive kind, that machines might struggle with
- There's the expansive, logical kind, machines are better suited for.
## Links
[1] - Hamming, R. (1997). The art of doing science and engineering: Learning to learn. CRC. <https://archive.org/details/artofdoingscienc0000rich>