Here, it’s best to be clear: equating a mind with a computer is not scientific, it’s philosophical. - Erik J. Larson

General (non-narrow) intelligence of the sort we all display daily is not an algorithm running in our heads, but calls on the entire cultural, historical, and social context within which we think and act in the world.

Notice that the story [of technical progress accelerating indefinitely] is not testable; we just have to wait around and see. If the predicted year of true AI's coming is false, too, another one can be forecast, a few decades into the future. AI in this sense is unfalsifiable and thus — according to the accepted rules of the scientific method — unscientific.

"Science, once a triumph of human intelligence, now seems headed into a morass of rhetoric about the power of big data and new computational methods, where the scientists' role is now as a technician, essentially testing existing theories on IBM Blue Gene supercomputers.
But computers don't have insights. People do. And collaborative efforts are only effective when individuals are valued. Someone has to have an idea. Turing at Bletchley knew — or learned — this, but the lessons have been lost in the decades since. Technology, or rather AI technology, is now pulling "us" into "it." Stupefyingly, we now disparage Einstein to make room for talking-up machinery."