Sorry I should have added... your statement "A human body may be a machine"
contradicts "a machine does not build itself from a single reproducing
cell. A machine does not care what it is doing, it doesn't get bored or
tired" - unless a human being is not the same thing as a human body, of
course. Is that the point?
On 16 October 2013 13:51, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 October 2013 13:48, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, that's begging the question. A human body may be a machine, but that
>> does not mean that a human experience can be created from the outside in.
>> That's what all of these points are about - a machine does not build itself
>> from a single reproducing cell. A machine does not care what it is doing,
>> it doesn't get bored or tired. A machine is great at doing things that
>> people are terrible at doing and vice versa. There is much more evidence to
>> suggest that human experience is the polar opposite of mechanism than that
>> it could be defined by mechanism.
>> So what is a human being, if not a (very complicated,
> molecular-component-containing) machine? (Or is "machine" being defined in
> a specialised sense here?)
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 post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.