On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:49:52 AM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012  Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com <javascript:>>wrote:
>
> > Just because it looks to us that the computer is following rules doesn't 
>> mean that it is. 
>>
>
> So now you don't like computers because they don't follow rules, before 
> you didn't like computers because they did follow rules. 
>

Did I ever say that I thought computers followed rules? Computers are 
unconscious. "They" don't follow anything. The parts that computers are 
made of are ruled by physical states, but I would not say that they follow 
any rules either.
 

>
> > We should not assume that suddenly a disembodied conscious agent appears 
>> somewhere just because we are impressed with the sophistication of a 
>> particular reflex action. 
>>
>
> We weren't talking about consciousness we were talking about intelligence, 
> but I can understand why you'd want to change the subject because 
> consciousness speculation is so easy and intelligence speculation is so 
> hard. 
>

What exactly do you think that intelligence is?
 

>
> > Reflexes can be as complicated as we want to make them, it doesn't turn 
>> them into voluntary actions. 
>>
>
> Just like everything else reflexes and voluntary actions happen for a 
> reason or they do not happen for a reason.
>

To exercise voluntary control is to create your own reason. There are 
sub-personal and super-personal reasons to create a reason, but they are 
not sufficient to account for the next step of the creation of a new reason 
on the personal level. 


> > The computer still has no choices.
>>
>
> Just like everything else a computer chooses X and not Y for a reason or a 
> computer chooses X and not Y for no reason.
>

The computer doesn't choose anything. A function is executed, that is all.
 

>
> >It can't throw a match because it doesn't want to hurt someone's feelings.
>>
>
> Not true. Winning the game might not even be the computer's goal, its goal 
> might be to cheer up the human. 
>

?
 

> And the computer can certainly include the emotional state of it's human 
> opponent in its decision making process if it had a database about how to 
> deduce human emotions from human behavior. 
>

So now you are saying that we can deduce consciousness from behavior?
 

> True, the computer might make the wrong connection between behavior and 
> emotion, but the humans might be wrong about that too; in fact we know for 
> a fact that sometimes they are, sometimes people misread people. 
>

> > What makes intelligence is the ability to step out of the system, to 
>> transcend the rules entirely or understand them in a new context. Computers 
>> don't do that. 
>>
>
> Hey Craig, no matter how hard you try to spin it, no matter how bad a 
> loser you are, the fact remains that you just got your ass handed to you by 
> a computer in that game of Chess you had with it, and again at checkers, 
> and in that equation solving game, and at Jeopardy. I don't care if you or 
> the computer transcended the rules or didn't transcend the rules because it 
> doesn't change the fact that the computer won and YOU LOST!
>

Who cares? I fail to see why that makes any difference at all. A telephone 
pole is much taller than you - therefore it is a genius at being tall and 
YOU ARE A HUGE LOSER and VERY SHORT.


> I remember when I was in grade school playing softball at recess the 
> losing team ALWAYS accused the winning team of cheating, it was tradition. 
> Adults aren't supposed to do that sort of whining, but often they do.
>

Adults are supposed to have outgrown seeing the world in terms of winning. 
Do you imagine that consciousness is a game?

Craig

 

>
>   John K Clark
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/imuH4lND9sUJ.
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