> The only serious counter-argument I've heard against the hypothesis that the brain goes further than a Turing machine
I'm confused... is the counter-argument AGAINST the brain being BEYOND a Turing machine (if I am to interpret your sentence literally)?
Or by this double negative do you actually mean the counter argument is AGAINST the brain being ONLY a Turing machine? (Because that's what the rest of your post sounds like.)
> and the output partly loops back to the input.
So? Turing machines have no issues with feedback loops; what would lead you to think they do?
I'm confused... is the counter-argument AGAINST the brain being BEYOND a Turing machine (if I am to interpret your sentence literally)?
Or by this double negative do you actually mean the counter argument is AGAINST the brain being ONLY a Turing machine? (Because that's what the rest of your post sounds like.)
> and the output partly loops back to the input.
So? Turing machines have no issues with feedback loops; what would lead you to think they do?