On 11 Aug 2012, at 12:47, Roger wrote:

Hi Alberto G. Corona

Agreed. Computers are quantitative instruments and so cannot have a self or
feelings, which are qualitative. And intution is non-computable IMHO.

Computer have a notion of self. I can explain someday (I already have, and it is the base of all I am working on).

Better, they can already prove that their self has a qualitative components. They can prove to herself and to us, that their qualitative self, which is the knower, is not nameable. Machines, like PA or ZF, can already prove that intuition is non-computable by themselves.

You confuse the notion of machine before and after Gödel, I'm afraid. You might study some good book on theoretical computer science. Today we have progressed a lot in the sense that we are open to the idea that we don't know what machine are capable of, and we can prove this if we bet we are machine (comp).

Bruno






Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/11/2012
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Alberto G. Corona
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-11, 04:08:29
Subject: Re: Where's the agent ? Who or what does stuff and is aware of stuff ?

The Dennet conception is made to avoid an agent in the first place because i so, it whould be legitimate to question what is the agent made of an thus going trough an infinite regression.

The question of the agent is the vivid intuition for which there are ingenious evolutionary explanations which i may subscribe. But a robot would implement such computations and still I deeply doubt about his internal notion oof self, his quialia etc. The best response to many questions for the shake of avooiding premature dogmatic closeness is to say "we don't know"

El 11/08/2012 07:57, "Stephen P. King" <stephe...@charter.net> escribi�:
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> 牋� I have noticed and read your posts. Might you write some remarks about Leibniz' concept of pre-established harmony?
>
>
>
> On 8/10/2012 8:53 AM, Roger wrote:
>>
>> Hence I follow Leibniz, even though he's difficult and some say
>> contradictory. That agent or soul or self you have is your
>> monad, the only (alhough indirectly) perceiving/acting/feeling
>> agent in all of us, but currently missing in neuroscience and
>> neurophilosophy.
>
>
>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
> "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
> ~ Francis Bacon
>
> --
> 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 .


--
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 .

--
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 .

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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