SilasBarta comments on [Link] Scott Aaronson on Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity - Less Wrong

21 Post author: DanielVarga 15 August 2011 10:51PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (2)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: SilasBarta 18 August 2011 04:27:17AM 6 points [-]

This is really, really awesome and I hope it gets traction in the philosophy community. Aaronson does a great job closing the inferential distance gap where necessary, gives his clearest yet exposition of topics related to computational complexity, a provides a truly enlightening, consistent way to view various topics.

In particular I liked his discussion of the "waterfall" argument (whether a waterfall can be said to be playing chess because you can find an I/O mapping to a chess program); it really outdoes the discussion of the same topic in Good and Real, where Drescher describes it as the "joke interpretation" of a rock in the context of consciousness.