On 08 Mar 2010, at 10:08, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
It's perhaps just a matter of definition but I would have thought the requirement for a hypercomputer was not compatible with computationalism, but potentially could still come under functionalism.
Putnam(*) is responsible for introducing functionalism, and he defines it explicitly in term of emulability by Turing Machines. The only difference with computationalism is that computationalism explicitly refer to the (unknown) level of substitution, something which remains implicit in Putnam's paper.
Now, if UDA is simpler with computationalism (or comp +oracle), AUDA, and thus machine theology, works for a vast set of weakening of computationalism (from machine with oracles, to abstract highly non effective notion of probability defined in terms of subset of models of theories, like in Solovay paper).
(*) PUTNAM H., 1960, Minds and Machines, Dimensions of Mind : A Symposium, Sidney Hook (Ed.), New-York University Press, New-York. Repris dans Anderson A. R. (Ed.),1964.
ANDERSON A.R. (ed.), 1964, Minds and Machine, Prentice Hall inc. New Jersey.
Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
