Peter Jones writes: > > > That doesn't follow. Comutationalists don't > > > have to believe any old programme is conscious. > > > It might be the case that only an indeterministic > > > one will do. A deterministic programme could > > > be exposed as a programme in a Turing Test. > > > > Then you're saying something strange and non-physical happens to explain > > why a program is conscious on the first run when it passes the Turing test > > but not on the second run when it deterministically repeats all the > > physical states > > of the first run in response to a recording of your keystrokes from the > > first run. > > It was never conscious, and if anyonw concludede it was on > the first run, they were mistaken. The TT is a rule-of-thumb for > detecting, > it does not magically endow consciousness.
Are you suggesting that of two very similar programs, one containing a true random number generator and the other a pseudorandom number generator, only the former could possibly be conscious? I suppose it is possible, but I see no reason to believe that it is true. Stathis Papaioannou _________________________________________________________________ Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
