[vidarh]

> Since electromagnetism cannot cause intentions, or goals, and since the human obviously has both intentions and goals (teleology)

You're begging the question here. If the world is materialistic, then physical processes can cause intentions, hence this claim is false if your conclusion is false.

[yc-kjh]

No, I'm not begging the question. In another response, I readily admit that if materialism is true, then AI is a foregone conclusion.

Please prove that mere electromagnetism can cause intentions, goals, and teleology. Limit yourself to Maxwell's equations, and the consequences thereof.

I look forward to your response, but I am not hopeful that you will provide a cogent answer.

[vidarh]

> In another response, I readily admit that if materialism is true, then AI is a foregone conclusion.

Of course, that is a meaningless admission when you repeatedly claim that it is proven that materialism is false elsewhere.

I do not need to prove anything. I've already explained why your claims are unproven and why your arguments does not support your conclusions unless your stated conclusions are already true.

I am not the one repeatedly making strong assertion of fact about controversial claims. The only thing I've made strong claims about is the logical validity of some of your arguments.

You might note that I've carefully tried to avoid making strong assertions at all in this matter. While I default to the materialistic hypothesis, I do so in the absence of evidence of anything else. Because of this default assumption, I by extension assume that human level intelligent AIs - and above - will eventually happen.

Those assumptions are as far as I'll go with respect to making claims about it, and there's nothing there that demands a proof, since I've not claimed they're proven, unless - given the context of this discussion - you want me to prove I actually hold those assumptions, rather than being some automaton that is somehow only capable of syntax.

[olalonde]

If you had told someone in year 1800 "computers are impossible, just go ahead and build one", said person wouldn't have been able to build one but you'd still be wrong. You can't just casually ask this in an argument about the theoretical possibility of AI.