On 17 January 2014 14:00, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:49 PM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 17 January 2014 13:43, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 17 January 2014 13:34, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I meant that if the physics of the brain is computable it follows as a >>>>> straighforward deduction that it would *at least* be possible to make >>>>> a philosophical zombie. It is then a further argument to show that it >>>>> would not be a zombie but a conscious being. >>>>> >>>>> I don't see this. Why would it at least be possible to make a >>>> p-zombie? (And if you can show by a further argument that it's a conscious >>>> being, then clearly it *wasn't *a zombie...) >>>> >>> >>> I think he means that strong AI would be possible, and then strong AI + >>> comp -> conscious programs. >>> >> >> I think I see. Strong AI implies intelligent programmes, but not >> necessarily conscious ones. However I'm still not sure about philosophical >> zombies, which I believe mimic human beings completely without being >> conscious. >> > > Right, so if you think there can be intelligent programs and you believe > zombies are impossible, then it implies computationalism. > > I guess so. It's just the "argument from incredulity" really, which I admit doesn't stand up. I just can't imagine how a programme could imitate a person convincingly for a long time without being conscious.
-- 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 firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.