Brent Meeker wrote:

> >That's not very interesting for non-conscious computations, because
> > they are only useful or meaningful if they can be observed or interact with 
> > their
> > environment. However, a conscious computation is interesting all on its 
> > own. It
> > might have a fuller life if it can interact with other minds, but its 
> > meaning is
> > not contingent on other minds the way a non-conscious computation's is.
> Empirically, all of the meaning seems to be referred to things outside the
> computation.  So if the conscious computation thinks of the word "chair" it 
> doesn't
> provide any meaning unless there is a chair - outside the computation.

What about when a human thinks about a chair ? What about
when a human thinks about a unicorn? What about a computer thinking
about a unicorn?

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to