https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2026/04/common-confusion-about-agency-will-soul.htm

A discussion about the paper on Academia.edu:
** The Asymptotic Illusion: On the Ontological Limitations of Artificial 
Agency, *Mohamad Al-Zawahreh, 25.12.2025
https://www.academia.edu/s/06c854dde5
 
<https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/5038575496362915977/6360608488321697022#>
*Todor Arnaudov* 
<https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/5038575496362915977/6360608488321697022#>
10 days ago 
<https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/5038575496362915977/6360608488321697022#>
Hi, this is a common confusion - building a straw-man of Turing machines or 
"computation" as defined in this abstract sense, while the counterpart argument 
refers to the full "stack" definition of the systems, down to the lowest level 
virtual universes (See Theory of Universe and Mind, T.A. 2001-2004+, e.g. 
"Stack Theory is yet another fork of Theory of Universe and Mind", 2025). 
Neither computers, nor LLMs, AI (in whatever form) or whatever are "just" 
algorithms, "computation" etc. - they are immersed in the Universe and their 
implementation includes those "non-computable" parts as well. On the other 
hand, all these advanced thinking, theories, logic, reasoning about "quantum" 
etc. would have been impossible without all the science and technology, all 
"mechanical" processing etc., i.e. the mighty "conscious" being wouldn't have 
been capable to even formulate these problems and their [personal] 
"superiority", they would have been just silly apes. There are a lot of 
discussions about that in TOUM, including the latest additions in the hyperbook 
*"The Prophets of the Thinking Machines: AGI & Transhumanism: History, theory 
and pioneers; past, present and future"*.   One point which I addressed in a 
letter to the cognitive semioticists Jordan Zlatev: the LLMs have no 
consciousness,  but "just" etc.  [see in appendix "Reflections on Everything" 
(Listove) from "The Prophets"]. However I haven't read anything but my own 
thoughts regarding the following problem, which is valid for humans and their 
mind as well: *WHAT and WHERE *exactly* the LLM is located, why and who 
(evaluator-observer) sets the boundary exactly there (at what resolution of 
causality-control and perception) and what *exactly* it is when fully defined 
in order to function. It is not "just" the weights of the NN (what the h* is 
"NN" in the physical universe - it includes the whole hardware, all chips, all 
connected computers - your PC or smartphone, the routers, the Internet servers, 
the main GPU servers; it included the original data, the data in the memory 
(other representation); it includes also the *HUMANS* who interact, their 
biology, their states; it is a result of a chain of operations and activities 
of all related humans and other technologies and ultimately it requires the 
whole universe to be what it is. * However, this is refuted and "vulgarized" to 
"they are algorithmic, they are "just 1s and 0s", "switches"  (the earlier 
nonsense about computers, still defended e.g. by F.Faggin). 
(...) 
See the link for the complete comment and references to additional material.
...

*The Sacred Computer: Thinking Machines, Creativity and Human Development - 
*since 2000
https://github.com/twenkid/sigi-2025
https://github.com/twenkid/sigi-202 <https://github.com/twenkid/sigi-2025>6



------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T6856665e9e29064f-Mf9a5bfbf95400d5d960fbbf6
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to