2009/4/25 Brent Meeker <meeke...@dslextreme.com>:

> No, I don't think the medium makes a difference.  But interpretation
> makes a difference.  Most computations we do, on pencil and paper or
> transistors or neurons, have an interpretation in terms of our world.
> Kelly is supposing there is a "self-interpreting structure" I'm not sure
> what he means by this, but I imagine something like an elaborate
> simulation in which some parts of the computation simulate entities with
> values or purposes - on some mapping.  But what about other mappings?

It's true that in the case of an ordinary computation in a brain or
digital computer the interpretation is fixed since the external world
with which it interacts is fixed. That's why brains and computers are
useful, after all. But if you take the system as a whole, there is no
a priori way to say what the interpretation of one part should be with
respect to another part. So we return to the position whereby a rock
could implement any finite state machine, if you only look at it the
right way.

Stathis Papaioannou

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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to