Comment by hnfong

One thing about Turing Machines that some people might miss is that the "paper tape, finite alphabet and internal states" thing is actually intended to model a human thinking out loud (writing their thoughts down) on a piece of paper.

It was designed to make it hard to argue that the answers to your questions are "no".

Of course there are caveats where the Turing machine model might not have a direct map onto human brains, but it seems the onus would be for one to explain why, for example, non-determinism is essential for a philosopher to work.

That said,

> Can a Turing machine of any sort truly indistinguishably simulate a nondeterministic system?

Given how AI has improved in its ability to impersonate human beings in recent years, I don't see why not. At least, the current trend does not seem to be in your favor.

I can see why you think the answer is "no". My understanding is that QM per se is mostly a distraction, but some principles underlying QM (some subjectivity thing) might be relevant here.

My best guess is that the AI tech will eventually be able to replicate a philosopher to arbitrary "accuracy", but there will always be an indescribable "residue" where one could still somehow detect that it is not a real human. I suspect this "residue" is not explainable using materialistic mechanisms though.