Le 25-mars-06, à 19:10, 1Z a écrit :
> The > Searlian point is that there is something about the actual, concrete > non-abstract existence/occurence of real physical processes that > explains the hard problems (IOW, "physics" in the sense of "territory", > not "map"). Searles is notoriously invalid in his conclusions, as I tend to think Hofstadter and Dennett Made clear. (And then the UDA is far more devastating than their argument). When you say yes to the doctor you already believed that a piece of the (mind) territory is relatively captured by a map. An artificial brain is not just a model, in that perspective. Comp does not explain everything, but it makes many problem at least formulable, and then partial solution arise. 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
