[ICBTheory]

I guess so too... but whatever it is: it cannot possibly be something algorithmic. Therefore it doesn't matter in terms of demonstrating that AI has a boundary there, that cannot be transcended by tech, compute, training, data etc.

[ffwd]

Why can't it be algorithmic? If the brain uses the same process on all information, then that is an algorithmic process. There is some evidence that it does do the same process to do things like consolidating information, processing the "world model" and so on.

Some processes are undoubtedly learned from experience but considering people seem to think many of the same things and are similar in many ways it remains to be seen whether the most important parts are learned rather than innate from birth.

[donkeybeer]

Explain what you mean by "algorithm" and "algorithmic". Be very precise. You are using this vague word to hinge on your entire argument and it is necessary you explain first what it means. Since from reading your replies here it is clear you are laboring under a defitnition of "algorithm" quite different from the accepted one.

[vidarh]

Why can't it be algorithmic?

Why do you think it mustn't be algoritmic?

Why do you think humans are capable of doing anything that isn't algoritmic?

This statement, and your lack of mention of the Church-Turing thesis in your papers suggests you're using a non-standard definition of "algoritmic", and your argument rests on it.