What is the goal of integrating mentally retarded people in normal schools?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Saven, Jun 16, 2009.

  1. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,135
    Corrected to what, you are saying that "we still do have control over our technological creations" ! No you don't. If you were, you would not be scared of technological results of anything. You have no control over anything, our civilization rely on what computers will say about what to do. When you enter any problem to computer and it says "you have to eliminate this amount of people" you could ask twice and control all inputs and ask for an alternative solution. And if you still get the same result, you would eliminate those "certain amount of people". We may not be doing this particular example now, but we do everything else computers tell us, including how we are going to fight against pandemics, what are we going to produce and how much.

    In theory you have control, and you can, for example, destroy all computers. But you can not do that. Just as nature can destroy us any minute, but it does not. Because, as you said, nature did not create us conscioussly and knowingly. So if nature wipes us out, it is going to be because of the change in some dynamics within the nature, and probably other species will be wiped out alongside our kind. We did not created computers willingly to help our problems, there were many different intention and minor developments, sometimes independent from each other, and this historical process made today's computers possible. No one in 1950s could calculate that in half a century computers would match the capacity of human brain and they would be part of almost every issues of in our lives. No one was calculating that this "problem solvers" would become a problem themselves.

    We can not even control ourselves, what are we talking about? We cause things and hope that they will help us, that's what we are doing.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Arrant specious nonsense.
    Computers don't tell us what to do.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Perhaps baftan if you had worked with some of the earlier computers, writing diagnostics for their circuitry in machine language and thereby being capable of isolating a specific failed flip-flop, you wouldn't be so scared of them.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,135
    Oh yes, they do. Because you can not calculate everything and you manage everything. They give you some result that you couldn't guess before. And you change your attitude, take precautions, or mobilize your dynamics accordingly. Computers have become a second nature for our existence. You manipulate energy and mass for your civilization via computers. They are not doing it consciossly, nor nature, yet they are playing parts even if you deny them.
     
  8. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    I've got the impression that you're talking about superhuman intelligence of machines and computers surpassing ours, yes?

    Well then ever heard of the turing equivalence? Well, first of all let me explain the meaning of turing complete. It's a way of mathematically stating certain levels of computational ability = Turing complete -- meaning a computer that is capable of solving all the problems that are named turing complete, or at the least simulate them -- which in turn can solve the problems.
    From Mac to Windows, all of those systems can technically solve all the problems that the other systems can, the only difference is in speed - some are faster and some are slower, but in the end they all solve the problems just as good. They're turing equivalent. - to be turing equivalent suffice to have the ability to simulate or be simulated by all other turing complete computers.

    Question is: Are we turing complete? Can we solve problems that those so-called turing complete computers can, or can we at least simulate them?
    Well, obviously we can when we're thoroughly motivated. When we invented those computers we had to simulate them(by drawing for example).
    Now, having previously mentioned turing equivalence -- are we turing equivalent? Can a turing complete computer simulate us? Theoretically a computer can simulate a human brain, and therefore compute and solve any problem that the human brain can solve; we're presumably turing equivalent.

    It's true though that many computers can do things which we can't. They're unbeatable in chess, for example. De facto, they're already smarter than us in some domains. But does that mean that they are superhuman? Well, no. We still can simulate them, right? They just beat us by far when it comes to speed.

    Well, we could argue now that speed is indeed a huge advantage and could be considered as one of the traits of being more intelligent thus surpassing us by far. But in the end all we have to do is unplug the machine from the power device and ignore the results the computer gave us.

    And yes, we can destroy all computers with no further problems because we have control over most of our actions contrarily to nature. It will probably remain a mystery how you can compare a sentient being to mother nature.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2009
  9. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    They make calculations faster.
    Computers cannot calculate something that we can't express mathematically, and we put in the data.
    And we can always ignore the results...

    Also largely untrue.
    In my profession we already have a very good idea of what to expect the result will be*, and if we get something we wouldn't have guessed we rerun and check everything. And if the result stays the same it's investigated thoroughly, to find out why.
    No one, but NO ONE takes the "word" of the computer if it's not an expected result.

    Only as much we did those things based on the result of a pencil-and-paper calculation.

    So a few decades ago you'd have been equally suspicious of calculators?
    And prior to that slide-rules?
    And prior to that log tables and pencil & paper?
    And prior to that... oh wait.
    Maybe you'd have been perfectly satisfied with guess work and "hoping" that you'd got it right.

    * In fact it was a fairly regular occurrence for me and others in my office to look at the results of a calculation done by (usually an apprentice) and say "that result's wrong, redo it". And if they got the same result we'd sit down and work out where they'd gone wrong. Because in the vast majority of cases we had a very good idea of what the result would be, even if only a "ball park" figure.
     
  10. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,135
    No, are we supernature intelligence of bodies and minds that surprassing nature? Just a different but -for now- an efficient entity in nature, because we are capable of harvesting more from nature than our naturally established capabilities. Because we established an environment (human civilization) where we can exercise what we call "unnatural" or "artificial (human centric)" activities.

    When you shut down all computers you know where you are going to end up. You can even control trade routes of 7 billion people with paper mails and telephones, you need an artificial intelligence to organise things. "I can shut down computers" is the same thing to say "I can commit suicide". Yes you can commit suicide, but what does it prove? Does it prove that you are in charge? You are gone, eliminated, vaporized if you commit suicide, and this would be hardly an achievement.
     
  11. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Well, EXCUSE me for having misunderstood your point. I couldn't help but think that you're trying to proof that our computers will some day come back at us and electrocute us to death.

    You're right, we ARE dependent on our computers to some extent, but that's just because it's a lot easier and faster. Without computers we'd find other options of how to make our time being on Earth simpler. But does this really imply that computers... control us? F*ck no.
     
  12. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,135
    I bet your office is the busiest place on earth Oli..

    You know what, you are absolutely right, computers have no determinacy over our civilization at all, and we could do more or less same without them, if not better.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2009
  13. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Oops, you misread the post.
    But the office I was in was typical of every office I've worked in, and those of people I know.
    In my opinion anyone, and I mean anyone at all, who doesn't have "gut feeling" or some idea of what the answer will be before the result comes out has no business whatsoever being anything other than an learner.
    Anyone with experience at their job gets to know what factors are relevant and what the likely outcome will be.

    No, we couldn't do better, since computers take the drudgery out the work and allow faster dissemination of the results.
     
  14. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Determinancy? or determinacy?
     
  15. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Uh, can I get back to you on that?

    Or maybe: "Determine, Nancy!"?
     
  16. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Yeah...well...his last sentence didn't make sense to me [dot dot dot]. Maybe my language barrier here..showing its weakness. :shrug:
    Determinancy = dependency? What the f*ck is that doing in his sentence?!
    determinacy = yes?
     
  17. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    It should have been "determinacy", determinancy has a different meaning altogether.
     
  18. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Okay, mystery resolved. Now...how the Hell did he come to that conclusion? We were just talking about whether computers control us or not.
     
  19. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Presumably, since I pointed out that we aren't completely subject to the whims of computers, he decided to go completely the other way, in an attempt at either humour or sarcasm.
     
  20. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Damn, I missed the joke!
     
  21. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    It wasn't very good.
    At all.
     
  22. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    So, ...if a kid is born with no arms, no legs, is blind and deaf, and does nothing but eat, shit and piss. BUT ..."it" does have brain wave activity. Would y'all want to intergrate him into the normal, regular school system?

    Be careful how you answer that question! It just might reveal how you really feel about this issue.

    Baron Max
     
  23. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,135
    You are giving an extreme example; a kind of example that tries to include all types of functionality issues to one hypothetical person. Within the realm of current possibilities, this person will never be fully adapted to society in general, let alone school system. You did not mention any brain issues in your example. In this case, if we could provide artificial limbs, hearing and vision, we could provide tools for this particular individual to experience the general opportunities. If we can not reach his/her brain and existence this is not his/her disability, but ours. Nature is challenging us, it is matter of whether we are going to obey it or not.
     

Share This Page