"Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Third, humans appear to be able to do things that have been proven to not >be >capable of being reduced to algorithms.
Can you give an example that can't be handled by the following algorithm: - Make a handful of well-educated guesses a second - Filter using a massively parallel pattern matcher with billions of computational elements trained with the task for 18+ years - Repeat a few times. Say "Hmmmm...." while doing this. - After some stability threshold is reached, say "Aha!" - Try out the result. If it's wrong, say "Ooops!" and color your cheeks red. I think you're underestimating how often humans get things wrong. >Handling self-referential >statements is one of these things. I realize that Dennett argues that >humans only appear to be able to do this, its just that they have >algorithms >that search the possibilities until they stumble over them...like a chess >playing program. However, it is very curious that humans would have such >an >algorithm in their heads without being able to access most of the results: >since such access would be evolutionarily favored. That just sounds silly. A billion element parallel pattern matcher is great at extracting the wheat from the chaff. It's even great at finding wheat where there isn't any (e.g. the Face on Mars). Joshua _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
