Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In one of his three Annus mirabilis papers of 1905, on special relativity, Albert Einstein noted that, given a specific definition of the word "force" (a definition which he later agreed was not advantageous), and if we choose to maintain (by convention) Newton's second law of motion F = ma (mass times acceleration equals force), then one arrives at / (/) as the expression for the transverse ...
[93] He nevertheless contends that full scientific understanding will not close the gap, [45] and that analogous gaps do not exist for other identities in nature, such as that between water and H 2 O. [94] The philosophers Ned Block and Robert Stalnaker agree that facts about what a conscious experience is like to the one experiencing it cannot ...
Solipsism (/ ˈ s ɒ l ɪ p s ɪ z əm / ⓘ SOLL-ip-siz-əm; from Latin solus 'alone' and ipse 'self') [1] is the philosophical idea that only one's mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind.
The no devil corollary is similar, but argues that a worse being would be one that does not exist in reality, so does not exist. The extreme no devil corollary advances on this, proposing that a worse being would be that which does not exist in the understanding, so such a being exists neither in reality nor in the understanding.
However, none of them have ever known man as modern thought has done. The humanism of the Renaissance, the rationalism of the "classics" assigned human beings a privileged place in the order of the world, but they did not think of man. [4] This happened only with Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, when the entire Western episteme was overturned.
Understanding this more nuanced reality is crucial for executives navigating the AI landscape—we need to move beyond the binary question of whether AI has reached human-level intelligence and ...
Number exists only in the mind. The same thing is described by different numbers according to the mind's viewpoint. An object can have an extension of one, three, and thirty six, according to its measurement in yards, feet, and inches. Number is relative and does not exist separately from a mind. [12]
He concludes that either this representation is a true understanding of the quality, in which case we revert to the earlier problem faced by those who believe universals are real; or, if the mental abstractions were not a true understanding, then 'what is understood otherwise than the thing is false'. [2]