It is a temporary condition, I assure you. Truth is eternal. This material life is a crucible: The 'foam' rises to surface and is wiped away; what remains is what is. Like shall be with like: Light with light; darkness with darkness. (Harmonic systems ...)

> How real neurons respond to real environmental cues is still not entirely clear, and our understanding is becoming more complex year upon year. For example, it was recently shown that the firing of an action potential is not a mere superposition of the inputs to a neuron, as was previously thought, but actually is highly dependent on the order in which the inputs are received. That is, in neurons, logic gates are not the same as the logic gates in an electric circuit, which I believe is the underlying assumption in a Turing machine.

I didn't hear about that, but your conclusion is incorrect:

A neuron is modelled as an FSM [1]. You are perfectly correct that a simple logic gate is an inaccurate model for our new understanding of the neuron. But a temporally ordered selector set across n input feeds can be trivially modeled with a multiplexer front-end and a demultiplexer back-end. (In other words, the organic neuron is cleverly O(1) given the permutation set of threshold exceeding event based on a temporal ordering of the input activations, whereas the model will be O(n) -- in terms of space.)

It remains a Turing Machine.

> I suppose our divergence is that I don't think of LW as "merely philosophizing". I am of the opinion that good philosophy underlies good science. To me, he was showing us how to think, and thus, how to understand the world around us.

I have deep respect for Wittgenstein's mind. Let's discuss TLP:4.1252 [2]

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite-state_machine

[2]: http://people.umass.edu/phil335-klement-2/tlp/tlp.html#bodyt...