tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8462179374588422234.post4851129537334196441..comments2023-05-25T11:03:27.144-04:00Comments on e.m. cadwaladr: What We Can’t KnowUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8462179374588422234.post-24578104353374085992011-08-08T18:30:16.988-04:002011-08-08T18:30:16.988-04:00Scientific American just had an article on the phy...Scientific American just had an article on the physical limits of intelligence, wherein they asserted that various thermodynamic constraints restrict the absolute maximum level of intelligence. Basically, if you make neurons bigger so they have more connections, they are further apart so connections take longer to activate. So you're stuck in a certain range of nodes to network size. This supports your opening thesis.<br /><br />There is also Goedel's observation that no formal system can be complete. This implies we can't ever formally analyze our own consciousness to completion.<br /><br />However, you are quite right that abandoning collective knowledge would wreck epistemology. :D I think that might be a bit premature. For example, even what you call personal knowledge is really just shared knowledge for a collection of neurons. However, there is no reason to suspect this frees the sum total of knowledge from all thermodynamic constraints.MCPlanckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09239576472889126413noreply@blogger.com