> See my previous post, I'm also answering them in the order that I read
> them
> (otherwise I'll never get back to them).
> If your model is adequate, then it should allow you to implement a replica
> of what
> it is that you're modelling such that the replica behaves the same as the
> original, or
> close enough to the original. Now, you're not going to say that a model
> might be able
> to behave like a human scientist but actually be a zombie, are you?

Hell no! I am saying that scientific behaviour...(open ended unveiling of
exquisite novelty and its depiction in the form of communicable
generalisations to an arbitrary level of abstraction).... mandates
phenomenal consciousness. I am not saying only humans can do this. I am
only saying phenomenal consciousness is necessary. On its own is it not
sufficient, but is it absolutely necessary. Machines will be scientists in
the future. Like us. Better, probably, necause they won't be as hung up on
being right, the status quo, the received view, the we humans

Colin Hales

 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