日別アーカイブ: 2020-01-07

  • きょうの予定は?【①・・・②・・・③・・・④・・・⑤懸案事項/ある(大雪とか・・・)・・・⑥/QnS(富士川町パン作り)猿(放大レポート書き英文)・・・】ってことでやってみます。

QnSがパンを焼きに富士川町へ行った。オレはウチで放大の英語レポートを書いている。出来たので「きょうの英語」に挙げておきます。訳は付けませんが必要なら何か機械で翻訳してしてみてください。

機械(=PCのことらしい)は考える(ようになる)かという1950年のA.Turingの設問が典型的な偽問題だと書きました。

きょうの英語::A report to an open air univercitie’s subject “Reading a cultural English”.

To the 3rd; “On Mathematical Engineering”

What a hell! It’s a complete fake question. I would like to say that we can’t know whether the machine(=PC) think or not. We can’t observe others  “Think”.  Because the “Think” belongs to the texture, and the texture only occurs in “me”.

Consider the following pair. ➀ (You: Think) ② (He: Think) ③ (I: Think) ④ (PC : Think) . In these four, only ③ is possible. I can observe “Think” only in myself. We can’t observe others.

Change your viewpoint. Those are about wind, sky, stars, galaxies, space, etc. I’d also like to ask to Turing “Why didn’t you rise a same question to them?”

The wind blows, the sky is there, the stars shine, the galaxy included, the universe is big,,,. Isn’t that enough? Why do we need to ask a question that “do the wind think?”. But Turing did it to the machine. Does the wind blowing proof of “Think”?  That why I say Turing brought up a fake question.

But I am positive about a fake question. These are many. Fake questions are our treasures. I love them. It’s because fake question is so useful when we “think” what a language is. Thank you Turing, for your add to.

きょうの四小節::あ~

きょうの漫画::スケッチ「・・・」