hardcore newtonians through the ages are the most delusional kind of scis though
>>11533419>>11533216can you describe and explain emergent phenomenae just by knowing precisely the vector and position of each node in the network? Or ir is more than the sum of the parts?
However Penrose would be more about how mechanistics paradigms are not power enough. He has this theory about quantum stuff going on at levels such as the microtubules (channels inside of the axons) hence you will need some non euclidian moddarfuking magic..
Butfrom an epistemologic point of view: there are things that are not a mtter of precision.
All new computational fags think they can describe human behaviour (mind, psychophysiology, cognition, soul, you name it thorugh the ages) with computational models. It is worthy of course, but utopian. And it is of course not a new idea, whats changed are computer capacities
Anyways I have no idea because I did watced the video and I am emigrant from /mlp
How can you describe subjetive experience with numbers? May you replicate it? Probably
science: describe, explain, predict.
