i thought about that right off the bat, but then i also thought about watson. These these artificial intelligence ish things that are able to out perform people at chess and jeopardy. They have a giant portion of human knowledge already inside their artificial minds,. And they can search it with a super goglish typed thing inside their brains. Im and i already felt myself arguing myself out of my scepticism, and then you'd go from there. But you talk about, you now, debate just feels like a different thing. Persuasion feels like it's uniquely emergent human consciousness problem thing. I had the same reaction to it you predicted the reaction of the audience, especially me.
This episode, featuring Andy Luttrell of the Opinion Science Podcast, is all about a machine, built by IBM, that can debate human beings on any issue, which leads to the question: is persuasion, with language, using arguments, and the ability to alter another person’s attitudes, beliefs, values, opinions, and behavior a uniquely human phenomenon, or could you be persuaded to change your mind by an artificial intelligence designed to do just that? If so, what does that say about opinions, our arguments, and in the end, our minds?
Patreon: http://patreon.com/youarenotsosmart