I don’t see why not - just a heads up though: you will be educating me more on Kant than I you. I will do a refresher right now - sounds like a lot more fun than the other forum I was just on.
I am wondering whether a bit of Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason may have already made it into our conversation involving motives.
I also like ideas that resemble the following for a more sophisticated pattern of a prime directive:
“Act in such a way that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle of a universal legislation.”
Let me ask a very simple question: Do you like Kant?
Regarding Critique of Pure Reason; did you have any particular thing in mind or did you want to analyze and possibly debate the whole thing? Maybe in a point by point format - it could take a while.
I am kidding around of course.
“I do not mean by this a critique of books and systems, but of the faculty of reason in general, in respect of all knowledge after which it may strive independently of all experience.”
Let me start by introducing a small part of my project; I also want to note that I am slightly influenced by David Hume’s concept of impressions; So I am creating a smart bot that uses my own concepts of natural language processing built upon a few disciplines, including but not limited to philosophy. In an experiment I am currently working on (that on the surface resembles that of a “real world” chat bot) you feed the bot input. The input enters a ‘sensing stage’ via a lexical analyzer that I have called the “inception group”. Part of this inception group is to detect new words that I call ‘incepts’. The ‘incepts’ are in reality a way of placing a tag on any word it has never encountered before. The next level that is encountered are the ‘percepts’ and all a ‘percept’ is in this case is a word the bot has encountered before but is still not entirely sure what meaning it holds. Obviously we jump a little bit between the aforementioned processing and processing on Kant’s level. Suffice to mention that somewhere along the way we have also included different forms of ‘bounded rationality’ that we have already discussed in this thread and some ‘other fanciness’ to help us process some thought to provide for output. The last stage simply passes output to the user to read. That is that . . .
NOTE: I have encoded a form of impressions inspired by Hume that are of a numeric type whereby each number corresponds to a word contained in what I call ‘a multidimensional categorical matrix’. Small dot delimited chains of the numbers form the impressions. There is a clear cut distinction between the input and the impression that I will not go into here.
Moving right along . . .
This is extremely similar to the inspiration I have in my mind.