cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/52276726

Dawkins points out how the goalposts have been moved from the Turing test without justification and claims it can be viewed as a test of consciousness.

    • qprimed@lemmy.ml
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      89
      ·
      4 days ago

      his brain has been shitting itself for a while now. cognitive decline comes for us all at some point, and more deeply for some.

      • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        4 days ago

        There’s a theory that he had a minor stroke at some time, possibly during the Covid pandemic, which subtly degraded his cognitive abilities, turning him from a somewhat aloof smart guy into the kind of boomer grandpa that gets pig-biting mad at the latest outrage bait. Him declaring that a LLM is an intelligent lady-friend would line up with this.

        • Infrapink@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          37
          ·
          4 days ago

          Dawkins was a grumpy old man long before Covid. He hasn’t had anything worthwhile to say since The Selfish Gene, and since at least 2010 he’s been largely pissed that people no longer acknowledge him as Pope of Atheism.

    • Pickleideas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’ve read several of his books. He’s a great communicator but he’s never been particularly intelligent outside of explaining evolution.

      • Krusty@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        52
        ·
        4 days ago

        All atheists are rather cringe. Who guess around self-proclaiming a label that literally means nothin? Are you aunicornist? Aleprechaun? Afairy? How silly.

        If you’re truly just agnostic… That’s a fair and humble admittance of ignorance.

        If you think the Bible is bullshit and the Quran is a lie, go with that. At least now you’re saying something meaningful relating to your actual beliefs.

        • Skavau@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          All atheists are rather cringe. Who guess around self-proclaiming a label that literally means nothin? Are you aunicornist? Aleprechaun? Afairy? How silly.

          What do you mean by “self-proclaiming”? I am an atheist because I don’t believe in a god(s). That’s it.

          If you think the Bible is bullshit and the Quran is a lie, go with that. At least now you’re saying something meaningful relating to your actual beliefs.

          By definition that is what atheists believe - so I am not sure what your problem is here.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          If you think the Bible is bullshit and the Quran is a lie, go with that.

          There’s a convenient word for that…

          • Krusty@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            No… The typical nonstance atheist saying, “I just don’t believe that,” is not the same as saying, “I think that is bullshit.” Those are two very different statements. Just as the propositions: I do not believe in any gods is different from saying I do believe there are zero gods or I do believe the existence of any/all god(s) is impossible.

          • Krusty@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            26
            ·
            4 days ago

            All right bro keep arguing against other people’s imaginary Friends with all that critical thinking you got.

            • 4am@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              One day old account named after a Simpsons clown on an instance somewhat known for having troll accounts arguing atheism doesn’t exist and (elsewhere in this thread) implying that all Jews in the media are mossad agents.

              I’m gonna go with “don’t feed the trolls” on this one, guys.

              • Krusty@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                Wooosh. You one of those people that doesn’t get a joke even when you’re told it’s a joke, huh.

                I didn’t say atheist don’t exist. I said it doesn’t mean anything. Most atheist have no stance(they’re not militant). They just don’t believe in something (which most of them don’t even know what it is they claim not to believe in) that’s it. Wookie-fucking-raaawwrrghh-do. Chewbacca makes more sense than atheism.

                Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? Atheism.

                And no I don’t think John Liebowitz is mossad. Jfc. Go touch grass.

                • Skavau@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I didn’t say atheist don’t exist. I said it doesn’t mean anything. Most atheist have no stance(they’re not militant). They just don’t believe in something (which most of them don’t even know what it is they claim not to believe in) that’s it. Wookie-fucking-raaawwrrghh-do. Chewbacca makes more sense than atheism.

                  What do you mean “no stance”? I agree that most atheists aren’t especially interested in having religious or philosophical arguments, but they still hold a position.

                  Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? Atheism.

                  How do you work that out?

                  • Absurdly Stupid @lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 days ago

                    In a world where “no opinion” is a stance, every thought must be labeled as a stance, even no thought at all.

                    Just let it go

                  • Krusty@quokk.au
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    Nonstance atheism is also called weak atheism, and the amount of weak atheists that still want to argue about it amazes me.

                    I concur with you, “non-belief” is a position! Otherwise, what the hell are they arguing about? Ignorance itself?

                    The critique is that absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. So if disbelief is justified only by “I haven’t seen proof,” then it risks becoming an argument from ignorance.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          An atheist doesn’t simply disbelieve in the gods, they believe other people should also disbelieve in the gods. It’s a political stance as much as a belief. If someone doesn’t really care about religion, they’re not really an atheist imo - it requires that extra step.

          • Krusty@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Oh, wow, Evangelical atheism. Perhaps the worst form of atheism. Kind of like prescriptive nihilism.

    • Krusty@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s not his point. His point is AI has reached a stochastic parrot level. The OG test was simply, “can you tell between a human or not?” Dawkins admits this line it’s exceptionally blurry at this point and better turing tests are needed.