We have also had (for me) very rewarding discussions on many other topics, for example the prospects for Artificial Intelligence, deep learning, multi-layered neural nets, automation and robotics, singularity, and related matters, exploring the claims and predictions and looking closely at the results that have been achieved, their intellectual contributions and social import. We have also discussed many other issues, ranging from intellectual history, to world affairs and contemporary geopolitics, to foundations of mathematics, to such matters as recent discoveries about communication in the plant world. He has also tried, so far with limited success, to carry forward my wife Valeria’s efforts to introduce me to the world of jazz and its wonders. Whatever comes up, Jeffrey not only has a lively interest but also unconventional and challenging ideas and thoughtful suggestions.
These people elevate their own banal conversations to the heights of philosophical inquiry. They get together over a $400 dinner and say the exact same shit anyone of us says about AI. Well, minus the giddiness of how we can profit from it through our investor friends. The conversation you have with a friend while smoking a blunt after watching a science documentary is just as informed and insightful as what these people talk about. But since they’re rich and can summon a pop-sci author to their dinner table, they convince themselves that they’re intellectuals. It’s just Joe Rogan. Talk to a bunch of “experts” and you become an expert. They don’t have challenging ideas because they don’t have any ideas of their own.
Chomsky, someone who does have some intellectual chops, despite being an establishment stooge, accepts this sophistry at currency. He does this because despite his intellectualism is still impressed by power and money. He’s just happy to be at the dinner table.
Also, outside of linguistics where he is a legitimate expert, his intellectualism is vastly overstated. People on “the left” love him in very large part because of Manufacturing Consent, but by Chomsky’s own admission Edward S. Herman was its main author. When you’re left with things like his public statements on political issues, you are confronted with the fact that he’s a god damn fool if not fully a bad actor.
People tend to overestimate the general applicability of expertise of all sorts. There are plenty of brilliant surgeons that I would not trust for a second with a question about marine biology or politics or philosophy or classic literature or any other intellectual pursuit.
We really need to dismantle the concept of “intelligence” because it just isn’t real. There’s no such thing as a smart person or a dumb person. Just people with varying levels of skill and expertise in any number of different things.
There are plenty of brilliant surgeons that I would not trust for a second with a question about marine biology or politics or philosophy or classic literature or any other intellectual pursuit.
there are plenty of brilliant surgeons i wouldn’t trust with a mop and a bucket of water
There’s also the issue where, if you’ll cede for the sake of argument that general intelligence exists, that does not mean that being very educated in one thing gives you an education in other things, and there are principles of reasoning (and proofs and such) that are present and frequently used in some fields but not others, so general intelligence doesn’t get you very far when you are deeply uninformed because even basic reasoning within a field may be beyond you in many cases (unless you actually study it like the people in that field did).
There are plenty of brilliant surgeons that I would not trust for a second with a question about marine biology or politics or philosophy or classic literature or any other intellectual pursuit.
I would not trust the world’s greatest heart surgeon to operate on my brain. The same thing applies to lawyers. Some lawyer who specializes in copyright law knows jack shit about inheritance and handling an estate. Professors are hyperfocused on their particular field, and depending on how much of a crank they are or how much of an ego they have, completely tunnelvision on their own idiosyncratic understanding of the field even as the field, headed by younger professors with less of an ego, move on.
These people elevate their own banal conversations to the heights of philosophical inquiry. They get together over a $400 dinner and say the exact same shit anyone of us says about AI. Well, minus the giddiness of how we can profit from it through our investor friends. The conversation you have with a friend while smoking a blunt after watching a science documentary is just as informed and insightful as what these people talk about. But since they’re rich and can summon a pop-sci author to their dinner table, they convince themselves that they’re intellectuals. It’s just Joe Rogan. Talk to a bunch of “experts” and you become an expert. They don’t have challenging ideas because they don’t have any ideas of their own.
Chomsky, someone who does have some intellectual chops, despite being an establishment stooge, accepts this sophistry at currency. He does this because despite his intellectualism is still impressed by power and money. He’s just happy to be at the dinner table.
Case in point:
Also, outside of linguistics where he is a legitimate expert, his intellectualism is vastly overstated. People on “the left” love him in very large part because of Manufacturing Consent, but by Chomsky’s own admission Edward S. Herman was its main author. When you’re left with things like his public statements on political issues, you are confronted with the fact that he’s a god damn fool if not fully a bad actor.
People tend to overestimate the general applicability of expertise of all sorts. There are plenty of brilliant surgeons that I would not trust for a second with a question about marine biology or politics or philosophy or classic literature or any other intellectual pursuit.
We really need to dismantle the concept of “intelligence” because it just isn’t real. There’s no such thing as a smart person or a dumb person. Just people with varying levels of skill and expertise in any number of different things.
there are plenty of brilliant surgeons i wouldn’t trust with a mop and a bucket of water
There’s also the issue where, if you’ll cede for the sake of argument that general intelligence exists, that does not mean that being very educated in one thing gives you an education in other things, and there are principles of reasoning (and proofs and such) that are present and frequently used in some fields but not others, so general intelligence doesn’t get you very far when you are deeply uninformed because even basic reasoning within a field may be beyond you in many cases (unless you actually study it like the people in that field did).
I would not trust the world’s greatest heart surgeon to operate on my brain. The same thing applies to lawyers. Some lawyer who specializes in copyright law knows jack shit about inheritance and handling an estate. Professors are hyperfocused on their particular field, and depending on how much of a crank they are or how much of an ego they have, completely tunnelvision on their own idiosyncratic understanding of the field even as the field, headed by younger professors with less of an ego, move on.
Oh god as someone with a bio degree 19 and 20 are amazing
biolgy , np complete?
If it hadn’t come from literally Jeffrey Epstein I would suggest some of these could be taglines
You’re just jealous you haven’t come up with memebrane.