On 3/16/2015 4:32 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> you've exaggerated the example to create a straw man. Watson has some
local
database, he doesn't access the web for everything; so my analogy is
correct.
How is that a straw man?? The Jeopardy champagne Watson could't access the web for
*ANYTHING*. All Watson had was his memory, take away that and Watson would be as
clueless as a college professor who had totally lost his memory.
OK, change the analogy a little. Suppose you substituted for Watson's database one
learned entirely from the Conservapedia. Then Watson would be quite incompetent, but I
see no reason to think Watson would be less conscious.
> Bruno would say he's less competent, but more intelligent, but you seem
to
identify competence and intelligence.
If a person behaves is a certain way then he's intelligent, but if a robot behaves in
the EXACT SAME WAY then he's just competent. And that my friend is 100% triple distilled
extra virgin Bullshit.
Wrong distinction. Bruno identifies intelligence with learning. So a small child is very
intelligent, even though he isn't very competent.
Brent
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
