Er nonsense to you too. :}
Part of my asserting myself boldly here, was to say: look, I may be a
schmuck on AI but I know a lot, here (& in fact I'll stand by the rest of my
claims, - although if you guys can't recognize, for example, that free
thinking opens up a new dimension on free will, then there's probably no
point).
Consciousness Explained ... publ. 1991.
Crick's statements - 1991, Sci Am article... 1992
David Chalmers.. The Conscious Mind... Amazon gives me 1998, but it may have
been 1996 - when the consciousness studies wave was already starting.
Dennett and Crick were way ahead of the game and Chalmers, historically. (In
fact, Crick was almost certainly the crucial figure). Sure, Consciousness
Explained was attacked, though still influential.
My point is a historical/ sociological one - not an evaluative one. And
therefore I am perfectly entitled to make my future prediction about the
sociological/ scientific significance of Freedom Evolves - I could, of
course, prove totally wrong. But it's a point worth considering - IF you're
interested in how culture and science are changing. And note that Dennett
was even historically ahead if only just, of The God Delusion, with
Breaking the Spell.
(Oh, and even evaluatively, Dennett, I would argue, is the leading
scientfic, i.e. pro-science, philosopher in the world. Chalmers' credentials
in that respect are more dubious - not that I'm endorsing Dennett by any
means).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Loosemore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] The Advantages of a Conscious Mind
Mike Tintner wrote:
And if you're a betting man, pay attention to Dennett. He wrote about
Consciousness in the early 90's, & together with Crick helped make it
scientifically respectable. About five years later, consciousness studies
swept science and philosophy.
Nonsense.
Dennett's approach was scorned by many as a whitewash. He did not make it
"respectable".... if anyone did that, it was Dave Chalmers.
Crick, like many other philosophy wannabes, gave an opinion on the matter
that was just a big pile of evasions. Just about everyone and their
mother has written a book about consciousness, most of them trash.
Dennett, although a smart cookie, bit off more than he could chew on that
one. I note that he did not even bother to turn up at the Tucson
conference last year. I did -- and *my* theory of consciousness was the
first one ever to actually explain anything ;-) ;-). (Chalmers noticed,
but I don't think anyone else did).
Richard Loosemore.
Now he has just written about free will, and although the book was pretty
bad, it was important in being arguably the first by a scientific
philosopher to assert that free will is consistent with science and
materialism. I'll gladly place a friendly (and you might think
outrageous) bet with you that that book is similarly prescient and free
will will be the new default philosophy of science within 5-10 years. In
case you haven't noticed, it is actually already being widely taken in a
kind of de facto, implicit rather than explicit way, as the basic
philosophy of autonomous mobile robotics.
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&;
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database:
269.6.4/790 - Release Date: 05/05/2007 10:34
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
