On Jan 30, 6:54 pm, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 1/30/2012 3:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On Jan 30, 6:08 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>  wrote:
> >> On 1/30/2012 2:52 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> >> So kind of you to inform us of your unsupported opinion.
> > I was commenting on your unsupported opinion.
>
> Except that my opinion is supported by the fact that within the context of 
> chess the
> machine acts just like a person who had those emotions.  So it had at least 
> the functional
> equivalent of those emotions. Whereas your opinion is simple prejudice.

I agree my opinion would be simple prejudice had we not already been
over this issue a dozen times. My view is that the whole idea that
there can be a 'functional equivalent of emotions' is completely
unsupported. I give examples of puppets, movies, trashcans that say
THANK YOU, voicemail...all of these things demonstrate that there need
not be any connection at all between function and interior experience.

-- 
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to