I believe it is important to listen and learn from someone else's experience. As a certified instrument rated pilot for single engine aircraft I read many accident reports to learn what pilot actions/decisions led to fatal aircraft accidents. The NTSB reports detail a lot of factual information but the reasoning of the decisions made by the pilot was not always apparent. Simply stating "pilot error" that causes 90% of the accidents did not totally reveal the reasoning. Talking to other experienced pilots about the accident data revealed many perceptions about why the wrong choices were made that led to the accident. I believe we can always learn from more experienced people about virtually any topic. AI may choose good decisions but may not reveal the reasoning for many poor decisions.
First a Technical Point: I really like the format where there is a dialogue between folks on via video chat where each is looking at a monitor to the side of their camera. It creates a virtual space where each speaker can break the fourth wall and glance at the camera/audience. It might be fun to reverse the images so that each person is looking towards the other. Philosophical Point: 'Love' seems an domain Eric may have jumped away from quickly early in the discussion. It seems a case can be made that Love (other than Agape) can only *really* be learned from/with another person. While it's not strictly pedagogical it is does not seem the type of 'sponge-like/personal learning' Eric is making the case for. Philosophical CounterPoint: There is a book called 'Steal My Art' that points towards a view that the 'important' part of the proposed Terrifying Question is where one must integrate the learning in solitude, as it cannot be given by another. G. I. Gurdjieff on Low Level as World Disclosing (Hair): "Show me one who can do any thing well, that is a person I can have a conversation with"
I believe it is important to listen and learn from someone else's experience. As a certified instrument rated pilot for single engine aircraft I read many accident reports to learn what pilot actions/decisions led to fatal aircraft accidents. The NTSB reports detail a lot of factual information but the reasoning of the decisions made by the pilot was not always apparent. Simply stating "pilot error" that causes 90% of the accidents did not totally reveal the reasoning. Talking to other experienced pilots about the accident data revealed many perceptions about why the wrong choices were made that led to the accident. I believe we can always learn from more experienced people about virtually any topic. AI may choose good decisions but may not reveal the reasoning for many poor decisions.
First a Technical Point: I really like the format where there is a dialogue between folks on via video chat where each is looking at a monitor to the side of their camera. It creates a virtual space where each speaker can break the fourth wall and glance at the camera/audience. It might be fun to reverse the images so that each person is looking towards the other.
Philosophical Point: 'Love' seems an domain Eric may have jumped away from quickly early in the discussion. It seems a case can be made that Love (other than Agape) can only *really* be learned from/with another person. While it's not strictly pedagogical it is does not seem the type of 'sponge-like/personal learning' Eric is making the case for.
Philosophical CounterPoint: There is a book called 'Steal My Art' that points towards a view that the 'important' part of the proposed Terrifying Question is where one must integrate the learning in solitude, as it cannot be given by another.
G. I. Gurdjieff on Low Level as World Disclosing (Hair): "Show me one who can do any thing well, that is a person I can have a conversation with"