i cant believe it hasn't started yet.... I guess I'll go ahead and get it going for y'all:


WTF is up with this class?
does anyone have any old exams?
this fucking professor is crazy?
who wants to study with me???
arrrrrghhhh wtf wtf wtf
Dr. Austin sucks ballz
whine moan bitch complain

there.

1/24/2008 4:54:40 PM

lol


this thread gets made > 3 times every semester.

i don't have any of the old materials, but i actually liked it.

1/24/2008 5:06:04 PM

i dunno, i never went

1/24/2008 5:31:25 PM

I was gonna bump the old one, but who cares.

It's a reassuring fact to know that working with other student's on tests is not an NCSU Honor Code Violation, yet consulting a tutor before you take/open a test is.

FAILED LOGIC FTW

1/24/2008 5:50:38 PM

I was honestly thinking about starting this very thread yesterday. Nicely done.

1/24/2008 6:50:58 PM

When any of you guys took the course, did he start by spending 15+ minutes celebrating the fact his ex-mother in law died and demeaning her memory?

That was funny weird.

1/24/2008 7:13:10 PM

no idea. i didnt go to his class very much.

when he said all material was online, and all exams open note, i really didnt see the point in showing up any longer.

1/24/2008 7:34:35 PM

^^yes

1/24/2008 7:37:37 PM

lol gg on this thread creation.

I think I post in it every semester.

1/24/2008 8:55:35 PM

^^^^ Yes. He's not funny.

1/25/2008 12:30:44 AM

message_search.aspx?type=topic§ion=7&searchstring=340

distance ed + google ftw

1/25/2008 1:13:27 AM

those were last semseter

1/25/2008 11:28:29 AM

I loved this class (and the professor's coordinated t-shirts)!
All great professors are a bit out of the ordinary

1/25/2008 11:33:47 AM

The only thing really missing is a brown paper bag wrapped beverage.

Oh, and true intelligence is impossible to capture with a mere machine. Dualists unite.

1/26/2008 12:29:08 AM

Eh, they've taught robot insects to lie. Give them 50 years, quantum computers, and lack of foresight and "mere machine" will sound oxymoronic.

1/26/2008 1:09:51 AM

can they just ban that class

1/30/2008 10:11:54 PM

I am kind of amused by how illogical this dude is.

It's so ridiculous it's funny.

1/30/2008 10:31:30 PM

please be sure to tell him that during class

1/30/2008 10:33:58 PM

I like the class because it's low time commitment

No class I take in the PHI department is going to be based on rational thought

1/30/2008 10:46:49 PM

i went to the first class then never went again. I was kinda disappointed that I never had to go because all the material was online. He was funny as hell the first day, what a waste.

1/30/2008 11:07:15 PM

i'd like to take the class over, but I don't have the time. it is a great class. I made an A, but I think I was a little bit too young when I took it to take full advantage of what I was learning.

1/31/2008 1:05:21 PM

Quote :

"No class I take in the PHI department is going to be based on rational thought"

oh, i see. another neckbeard who's smarter than the entire PHI dept at NC State.

1/31/2008 2:07:15 PM

I'm taking the class now and am trying to get to the "center" about what the class is all about.

I feel like the lectures don't draw a conclusion to whether or not anything is a pseudoscience.... he makes valid points against many of them, but can't say for sure.

Is this whole point to just keep your mind open and not pass definitive judgement?

If not, I don't understand what the point is.

1/31/2008 4:49:10 PM

who said there was a point?

1/31/2008 5:12:31 PM

Quote :

"I'm taking the class now and am trying to get to the "center" about what the class is all about."

I'm in the class now too.

I just treat the material like you would the rantings of a lunatic: amusing but utterly useless. There isn't a point to any of it, it's clear his philosophical viewpoint is not based in reality.

1/31/2008 5:40:57 PM

There should be more girls like you, Vix.

2/1/2008 10:29:40 AM

Quote :

"Oh, and true intelligence is impossible to capture with a mere machine. "

Like, for example, a brain. Or the brain of mathman, at any rate.

2/4/2008 11:42:10 AM

well actually that would be part of my argument, the mind is certainly more than the brain. But, hardware aside, I think there is something unquantifiable about genuine decision making. I cannot prove this. But, I cannot help but think that logic (which can be programmed) is not an adequate model for human decision making.

Cue insults and/or sexist comments.

2/4/2008 11:43:08 PM

Quote :

"I think there is something unquantifiable about genuine decision making. I cannot prove this. But, I cannot help but think that logic (which can be programmed) is not an adequate model for human decision making."

So there is no reason for thinking intelligence is unquantifiable? I'm not trolling, just asking. I read this board from time to time and you seem to be a generally reasonable person. Is this a non-physical soul type argument?

[Edited on February 5, 2008 at 12:50 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on February 5, 2008 at 12:51 AM. Reason : spelling]

2/5/2008 12:49:54 AM

Quote :

"I think there is something unquantifiable about genuine decision making."

It's called "sensation".

2/5/2008 10:22:07 AM

Quote :

"neolithic So there is no reason for thinking intelligence is unquantifiable? I'm not trolling, just asking. I read this board from time to time and you seem to be a generally reasonable person. Is this a non-physical soul type argument?"

The observations I see that support my belief that human decision making is unquantifiable are the
- people from nearly identical backgrounds making different choices
- more generally people making illogical choices
- human creativity
- intuition
to name a few. Now you could argue that these are all completely explained with sufficiently complete picture of how the choices were motivated, but I find these arguments unconvincing based on my own experience.

There have been many times when I knew the right answer before I did a calculation, how did I know this? Where did the creative leap come from. I never did that thing before, its technical but I can assure it wasn't just mimicking past actions and there were certainly other logical paths. Why did I choose that one?

Now I said "I cannot prove" this because my evidence is anecdotal and certainly is not going to meet the inane standards for proof that arise in these philosophical discussions. Moreover, if I could prove it that would essentially amount to quantifying it thus negating my hypothesis.

I suspect it us an unknowable assertion.

As far as the mechanism, I would suspect our thoughts and choices are a mixture of biological suggestions and metaphysical deliberations. The arguments given in PHI 340 against the interaction of body and mind I find completely simplistic and beside the point. You cannot argue the nonexistence of something inside a system which is incomplete. Physics is far from complete, so when someone makes an argument that says this is not theoretically or observationally possible then I'm not that swayed.

I would summarize this by saying the soul is "nonphysical" under our current flawed version of physics. Now whether or not the soul will ever be captured in a future more complete theory of physics is an open question in my view. However, I doubt it for the philosophical reasons I mentioned earlier.

Hope that answers your question, I'd be glad to elaborate since nontrolling inquiries are so rare and precious in this forum.

[Edited on February 5, 2008 at 10:38 AM. Reason : .]

2/5/2008 10:37:45 AM

we're just a soggy bag of electro-chemical responses.

2/5/2008 1:35:19 PM

you know what's sad?

this thread turning into a philosophical discussion.

2/5/2008 1:40:25 PM

Quote :

"As far as the mechanism, I would suspect our thoughts and choices are a mixture of biological suggestions and metaphysical deliberations. The arguments given in PHI 340 against the interaction of body and mind I find completely simplistic and beside the point. You cannot argue the nonexistence of something inside a system which is incomplete. Physics is far from complete, so when someone makes an argument that says this is not theoretically or observationally possible then I'm not that swayed. "

Whatever could you mean by 'metaphysical deliberations'?

Interaction of non-physical and physical would regularly and massively violate fundamental principles like conservation of energy and causal closure. You resolutely stick your head in the sand by saying, in effect, "even if current physics rules this stuff out, we can't be sure that our current theories are the final word on the matter, so I continue to believe in this crap." By the same token, current physics cannot guarantee that you'll die if you ingest massive quantities of arsenic; but that doesn't make it rational to believe that a large dose of arsenic will be good for you.

2/5/2008 2:05:05 PM

Quote :

"The observations I see that support my belief that human decision making is unquantifiable are the - people from nearly identical backgrounds making different choices - more generally people making illogical choices - human creativity - intuition "

Quote :

" There have been many times when I knew the right answer before I did a calculation, how did I know this? Where did the creative leap come from. "

What is creativity? I'd argue that its nothing more than a heuristically guided search. How does an artist create something completely original? They have measure of "goodness", of which they are probably not completely aware, that they use to keep themselves on some sort of coherent track. In this sense, creativity is highly mechanizable and in an algorithmic sense, bares a very similar resemblance to something like A*. There are a lot of projects already that have produced original works of art, music, and literature.

See: http://www.aaai.org/AITopics/html/create.html for some examples.

Quote :

" You cannot argue the nonexistence of something inside a system which is incomplete. "

I thought you were about to get Godelian on us, which is sort of what I thought you were hinting at earlier. I should have known better. After all, you are mathman.


I have an admittedly materialist slant, so I'm inclined to disagree. Something that is non-physical is impossible for me to wrap my head around. It feels like you're just putting off the work. Where does this non-physical entity reside? Are there regular laws where it exists? Does the non-physical part then need a meta-non-physical component? Is there some ether which is completely unlike anything we can imagine? You can see where I'm going with this. I'm not saying its impossible, it just seems less likely than its counter argument. So in this sense, I believe that human intelligence is perfectly quantifiable.

At any rate, thanks for taking the time to post a well thought out response.

[Edited on February 5, 2008 at 4:47 PM. Reason : I never get it right the first time]

2/5/2008 4:45:07 PM

Quote :

"As far as the mechanism, I would suspect our thoughts and choices are a mixture of biological suggestions and metaphysical deliberations."

wtf are you talking about? We have a nervous system. It creates perceptions of positive and negative sensations. That is the basis for our choices.

2/5/2008 10:33:36 PM

Are we allowed to work on the test next Friday together?

2/7/2008 3:20:29 AM

BTTT FOR EXAM 1!!

2/15/2008 1:19:21 PM

ugh yea this blows

2/15/2008 2:09:08 PM

anyone working on the test now?

3/28/2008 11:23:42 AM

I'm trying...

3/28/2008 11:39:33 AM

old tests are around

3/28/2008 4:29:34 PM

http://www4.ncsu.edu/~n51ls801/homepage.html

[Edited on April 6, 2008 at 7:33 PM. Reason : ]

4/6/2008 7:31:16 PM

^ that was fun. I think his webpage is way funnier than the course was in my recollection. I am disappointed my paper from Fall 2000 didn't make the cut.

4/7/2008 6:29:38 PM

paper.... did we have to write a paper for that class? i don't remember writing one.

4/7/2008 7:28:58 PM

No, he ended the paper requirement several years ago. I remember him talking about it from when I took the class in '05. Apparently 95% of the class always did it wrong, but of course he would never take responsibility for his shitty instructions or crackpot ideas.

4/7/2008 10:31:15 PM

i took the class in 01 or 02

4/8/2008 1:52:12 AM

^me too.

i went once or twice and passed (i had it pass / fail bc it was scary)

4/8/2008 3:13:25 PM

anybody need an upcoming study partner?

4/16/2008 11:04:31 PM

Dualism quiz ftl...

That shit is asinine.

4/17/2008 8:56:48 AM