Funny, someone else accused me of the same thing already today: "You've conflating 'real intelligence' with conscious experience." Real or literal intelligence is a conscious experience as far as we know. Metaphorically, we can say that something which is not the result of a conscious experience (like evolutionary adaptations in a species) is intelligent, but what we mean is that it impresses us as something that seems like it could have been the result of intelligent motives. To fail to note that intelligence supervenes on consciousness is, in my opinion, clearly a Pathetic Fallacy assumption. > If the > table talks to you and helps you solve a difficult problem, then by > definition the table is intelligent. No, you are using your intelligence to turn what comes out of the tables mouth into a solution to a difficult problem. If look at the answers to a crossword puzzle in a book, and it helps me solve the crossword puzzle, that doesn't mean that the book is intelligent, or that answers are intelligent, it just means that something which is intelligent has made formations available which my intelligence uses to inform itself. > How the table pulls this off and > whether it is conscious or not are separate questions. > I think that assumption and any deep understanding of either consciousness or intelligence are mutually exclusive. Understanding begins when you doubt what you have assumed. Craig > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.