Brent Meeker wrote:

> And evolution constructs brains to be essentially deterministic for the
> same reason.  So is it your theory that any deterministic sequence of
> states constitutes computation and the reason a rock doesn't instantiate
> computation is that, at the microscopic level its state changes are
> dominated by quantum randomness?

My theory is that to implement an algorithm something needs to
have the counteractuals that are part of the algorithm.

A machine needs to have distinct states (unlike a rock) and
to have them counterfactually/causally linked (unlike a cloud of gas),

> This thread started with a discussion of what computation could be
> counted as intelligent - or Stathis prefers "conscious".  Does your
> distinction entail that intelligence (or consciousness) is deterministic?

I never said intelligence was computational in the first place !

> Brent Meeker


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to