Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2/22/07, *Mark Peaty* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
...
> The idea of the Turing test is that "an algorithmic implementation of 
> rules" will give the required "degree of spontaneous creativity". If you 
> don't believe in this, then you don't even believe in weak AI, let alone 
> strong AI or computationalism. That is not a common position among 
> scientists and philosophers of mind; even John - anticomputationalism - 
> Searle agrees that the laws of physics necessitate that 
> human-indistinguishable AI should be theoretically possible. Roger 
> Penrose, and Colin, are very much in the minority.
> 
>     Stathis: 'I can meaningfully talk about "seeing red" to a blind
>     person who has no idea what the experience is like ... '
> 
>     MP: OK, but can he or she meaningfully understand you?
> 
> 
> They can understand many things about sight without actually 
> understanding what it is like to have it, just as we can understand many 
> things about a bat's sonar, in many ways much more than the bat 
> understands. But that part of vision or bat sonar which cannot be 
> understood unless the observer has it himself, no matter how good the 
> collected empirical data, is what is meant by first person experience.
> 
> Stathis Papaioannou

I'm not convinced that there is any such first person experience.

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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to