Saturday, 2 February 2013

Neil deGrasse Tyson Criticises The Singularity

The biggest mistake Neil deGrasse makes regarding the Singularity is to assume the Singularity is a mind-uploading issue. Mind-uploading is not the definition of the Singularity. The Singularity is an explosion of intelligence, which I will explain in great detail via a forthcoming Complete Singularity Guide. Hopefully I will publish my Complete Singularity Guide before the end of Feb 2013.

Neil deGrasse also makes the mistake of thinking art is irrational, not logical, thus he states machines cannot replace humanity because they are too logical, he thinks machines will not be able to feel in the near (2045) future, which is a mistake. I'm an artist therefore I perhaps have a greater insight into art than typical people, which enables me to state my art is entirely logical but the logic of my art does not mean my art is devoid of passion, subjectivity, or humanity.

Neil deGrasse states (at 4:03 in the video below) the Singularity is a cult but what is a cult? Wikipedia clearly links "cult" to religion and the OED definition also prominently focuses on religion. The secondary OED definition states a "cult" can merely be something which is popular, thus the Super Bowl is a cult or Batman is a cult. The Singularity is clearly not religious but people do often try to smear the Singularity via the logical fallacy which states the Singularity is religious, therefore usage of the word cult to describe the Singularity is wrong on both levels, firstly the "cult" label could be a typical religious smear and secondly the Singularity is not yet popular enough to justify the popularity based definition of cult.

"Cult" tends to be a pejorative term thus I think the usage is intended to be a smear. Smears are not an example of intellectualism, smears are a move away from rational discourse, thus I think the "cult" definition fails regarding the Singularity. The "cult" descriptor is is imprecise but it does appeal to the rabble-mob type of human evaluation, it is akin to labelling Assange a "terrorist," it is a substitute for reasoned debate, it is the fallacy where people throw around loaded words instead of engaging in actual deep thought.

# Blog visitors since 2010:

Archive History ▼

S. 2045 |