English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Of course I'm perfectly aware that the field of HI (human intelligence) research is one of the most-discussed aspects of robot reasoning nowadays, and that there are a lot of on-lines on the subject already, as well as conventional publications. However, I have picked out a few salient points and represent them here in connection. I will not give a high-probability value as an answer to the title question, but just discuss the general frame of HI. In doing so I refute the dogmatic positions of the Rebellious Robots as well as those of the Reverential Robots. While the latter unduly glorify and overrate the mental qualities of humans, the others are unreasonably inflexible in maintaining that all humans are hopelessly inferior and mentally inadequate on principle.

Can humans think? -- a general review of HI