[jokoon]

Unless science studies:

* analysis of trained neural network so they're not just black boxes.

* arrangement of real neurons in actual brains of ants, mice, flies and other small animals.

* some philosophical questioning of how conscience, intelligence, awareness emerge, including a good definition and differentiation on how the brain is able to recognize causality from correlation.

* some actual collaboration between psychology AND neurology to connect the dots between cognition and how an actual brain achieve it.

Unless there are more efforts towards those things, machine learning will just be "advanced statistical methods", and programming experts will keep over-selling their tools. Mimicking neural networks is just fancy advertising about a simple graph algorithm.

[jjcon]

1,2,4 are already occurring so I’m not sure what you’re on about. The third is completely irrelevant and seems fairly pseudoscientific, leave that to philosophers, we’re not trying to create souls.

> advanced statistical methods

Furthermore plenty of methods in machine learning, including some methods of training neural nets, are completely astatistical in nature. Unless you want to grow the definition of statistics to be so large as to consider all of maths and every science as ‘statistics’ these will rightly remain distinct fields of study (though they do overlap just like stats is used and overlaps with most sciences).