/lit/ - Literature

>>16065260
No, that's wrong. You have to reduce down the book - any book - to its simplest parts; and you'll see they're all composed of just words. Words are broken down in the computer to bits that can be reproduced and rearragend to make logical syntax. It doesn't matter if the computer "feels" or not, as long as it is able to create the end product that makes the words, regardless of what it has really "felt" or not. The fact that computers not only can understand logical syntax now but can actually make sensible and interesting new creations by themselves just goes to show that there really is nothing beyond the word. In the same way that we think that there must be "something" else to things like chess or Go, which are and have always been particularly interesting games for millenia, we think that there has to be a certain aspect of "hidden genius" behind the greatest players in the World. Turns out there isn't. If anyone breaks down chess to its simplest parts it is a board with certain set pieces that follow certain rules; turns out that linguistical syntax - although a lot more complicated -, also breaks down to just its single componests which are the words that make it.

i.e. look up language games. Read Wittgenstein.