That looks like losing your rationality by reading LessWrong. As does this by XiXiDu that he links to.

A couple of quotes from the latter strike me:

Logical implications just don’t seem enough in some cases.

and

Until the above problems are resolved, or sufficiently established, I will continue to put vastly more weight on empirical evidence and my intuition than on logical implications

That is as it should be. Blindly following logic wherever it takes you is like strapping yourself to a rocket with no steering.

I've never been able to make sense of the traditional koans, not because I find them hard puzzles, but because I don't even see what puzzle is being posed. But we have here in the LessWrong material koans aplenty.

Mentalism cannot be true! Physicalism cannot be true!

Bayesian reasoning is the only way! We cannot do Bayesian reasoning!

Aumann agreement! Dissension among rational people!

Human intelligence is possible! After sixty years of trying we haven't the slightest idea how!

Trolley problems!

TORTURE vs. SPECKS!

Quantum suicide!

Give me all your money and I'll repay you 3^^^3-fold!

The Utility Monster!

The Repugnant Conclusion!

You spend one dead child at Starbucks every year!

Vast stakes depend on your slightest decision! You cannot evaluate them! You must evaluate them!

You have six hours to cut down a tree! It will take twelve hours to sharpen your axe! The first god we make will torture you forever for failing!

Furthermore, the brain is massively parallel, and has a specialized architecture. For what it does, it's well optimized, at least compared to how optimized our software and hardware are for similar tasks at this point. For instance, laptop processors are general purpose processors, being able to do many different tasks they aren't really fast or good at any.

Intuitively this doesn't seem right at all: I can think of plenty of things that a human plus an external memory aid (like a pencil + paper) can do that a laptop can't, but (aside from dumb hardware stuff like "connect to the internet" and so on) I can't think of anything for which the reverse is true; while I can think of plenty of things that they both can do, but a laptop can do much faster. Or am I misinterpreting you?

It took 35,000 processor cores running to render Avatar. If we assume that a Six-Core Opteron 2400 (2009, same year as Avatar) has roughly 10^9 transistors, then we have (35,000/6)*10^9 = 5.83*10^12 transistors.

The primary visual cortex has 280 million neurons, while a typical neuron has 1.000 to 10.000 synapses. That makes 2.8*10^8*10^4 synapses, if we assume 10.000 per neuron, or 2.8*10^12.

By this calculation it takes 5.83*10^12 transistors to render Avatar and 2.8*10^12 synapses to simulate something similar on the fly. Which is roughly the same amount.

Since the clock rate of a processor is about 10^9 Hz and that of a neuron is 200 Hz, does this mean that the algorithms that our brain uses are very roughly (10^9)/200 = 5000000 times more efficient?

The switching rate in a processor is faster than the firing rate of neurons.

as a rough estimate it is reasonable to estimate that a neuron can fire about once every 5 milliseconds, or about 200 times a second

All else being equal, a computer should be faster than an aggregate of neurons. But all isn't equal, even when comparing different processors. Comparing transistors in a modern processor to synapses in a human brain yields many more synapses than transistors. Furthermore, the brain is massively parallel, and has a specialized architecture. For what it does, it's well optimized, at least compared to how optimized our software and hardware are for similar tasks at this point.

For instance, laptop processors are general purpose processors, being able to do many different tasks they aren't really fast or good at any. Some specific tasks may make use of custom made processors, which, even if their clock rate is slower, or if they have less transistors, will still vastly outperform a general purpose processor if they are to compete for the task they were custom-built for.