On Saturday, October 27, 2012 1:41:08 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
> > People don't have to prove that they aren't machines.
> So says you, but a computer might have a very different opinion on the
> subject, and I don't think you even have a clear understanding what a
> machine is.
Machines don't get an opinion. If they have a problem with that, they can
protest. But they won't.
> >> it explains why Evolution bothered to produce consciousness on this
>>> planet, it explains why it produced something that it can't see.
> How? HOW?! I've explained this numerous times, If you have a problem with
> my explanation then say what you don't like about it, but don't just say
> "how" like a parrot! I don't know why I even bother to debate with you if
> you don't even bother to read what I write.
Whenever you have no explanation, you get upset and imperious about it. If
you had an explanation you would write it. So you don't.
> >> Yes its conscious if the stop sign displayed intelligent behavior, but
>>> in this case if you say it did then you are not displaying intelligent
>> > Why?
> Why what?
Why am I not displaying intelligent behavior if I say that the stop sign
displayed intelligent behavior by directing the driver to avoid a
collision? Why EXACTLY? This will give you the explanation of why your idea
of intelligent behavior as an external reality is unworkable.
> 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
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at