On 12/31/2011 6:07 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
>So a self-driving car is probably much more close to have a first
>person view than a rock, especially if you make it possible for the
>car to memorize its short term instances of computation (sensing,
>planning, etc.) into a "long scenario involving herself".
Good point. Thanks Bruno. A self-driving car does have an estimate of its current state
and then it updates it both internally and based on external measurements. It also makes
some planning, soft of what to do next.
Yet, if we consider a self-driving car and a rock from the viewpoint of physicalism (or
could be even better atomism), then the difference will be much more difficult to find.
After all there are in both cases interacting electrons and nuclei (well probably some
electromagnetic waves as well) and nothing more.
Evgenii
That kind of "nothing buttery" applies to all explanations because any real explanation is
in terms of simpler things and relations. You could as well say Bruno's explanation is
nothing but arithmetic.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
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.
