It seems that it still comes down to whether the chip in the brain to
record all of life's experiences constitutes consciousness. Since I
do not believe that it does, it follows that nothing put into any linear
pattern can ever describe or encapsulate reality. What does this
have to do with the future and future writers, thinkers, etc. ?
We are still only thinking as far as our hands and literate minds
function. That is inadaquate for a serious discussion or exploration
of the universe, world society, the environment, any world culture,
a family or even an individual. Seems that the mechanistic theories
are alive and well and as destructive as ever. We can blame
bureacracy but the problem is the linear rule of science and Western
thought.
As a musician, the rules of thermodynamics were a total bust at
teaching anyone how to sing much less be an artist, even though
it was tried. We are surrounded by 2,000 year old religions controlling
language & the calendar and 200 year old science formulas controlling perception.
How else could we make such ridiculous mistakes? Sounds like your
typical 16 year old adolescent. Any parent who has gone through
that should be willing to grow up themselves or quit complaining when
their kid explains the world to them. Whether it is my kid or the local
minister, rabbi, mulah,
REH
"Brad McCormick, Ed.D." wrote:
> Brian McAndrews wrote:
> >
> > The following book review presents another view (and saves me a helluva
> > lot of typing!).
> >
> > Brian McAndrews
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Computer Power and Human Reason
> > by Joseph Weizenbaum
> >
> > San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman
> > 1976
> [snip]
>
> In my opinion, _Computer Power and Human Reason_ remains a
> challenge to our technistic way of thinking. It is as
> relevant today as when it was written. The review
> snipped here doesn't really do the book justice.
>
> As far as WTO is concerned, Weisenbaum wrote in the
> book that:
>
> By coming along in the nick of time to process
> data the way clerks were used to processing
> it, but when the *quantity* of data exceeded
> clerical capacity, the computer enabled the
> existing bureaucratic structures of society
> to survive when otherwise they would have
> either collapsed or been transformed. --If by
> "revolution" one understands a change in the
> social relations between persons -- the
> computer has been
> ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL FORCES FOR SOCIAL
> REACTION IN THE 20TH CENTURY.
>
> His chapter on "incomprehensible programs" and their
> social impact is highly admonitory.
>
> His ending shows the difference between
> judgment and calculation:
>
> I hope that, as the discipline of computer
> science will mature also, so that, whatever
> computer scientists do, THEY WILL THINK ABOUT
> IT, SO THAT THOSE WHO COME AFTER US SHALL NOT
> WISH WE HAD NOT DONE IT.
>
> This is an excellent, and highly readable
> book, both for lay persons and for techies.
>
> \brad mccormick
>
> --
> Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
>
> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
> -------------------------------------------------------
> <![%THINK;[XML]]> Visit my website: http://www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
