Magnus, Platt, All --
[Platt]:
Those interested in A.I. will find a recent article by David Gelernter
(who
needs no introduction to A.I. fans) at:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/gelernter10.1/gelernter10.1_index.html
He points out that human thinking involves a lot more than reason. Perhaps
you'll find his ideas helpful in understanding the MOQ's intellectual
level.
I don't think a professor of computer science is the best authority on human
thinking. However, for those who don't read this article, this paragraph
sums up Gelernter's argument:
"Human beings and animals are conscious and, as the philosopher John Searle
has argued (in effect), a scientist must assume that consciousness results
from a certain chemical, physical structure-just as photosynthesis results
from the chemistry of plants. You can't program your laptop or cellphone to
transform carbon dioxide into sugar; computers are made of the wrong stuff
for photosynthesis-and the wrong stuff for consciousness."
As I've said many times, the fallacy in relegating human functions like
consciousness, intellection, conceptualization, and sensibility to a
supra-human domain or level is that it makes man little more than a robot of
natural evolution. Of course we can build a machine that duplicates the
function of a thinking robot. In his own way, Pirsig's positing of the
universe as a "moral system" favors A.I development. His MoQ reduces
sentient subjects to mere "quality patterns" driven by nature's universe
rather than by their own rationalized value-sensibility. The consequence of
this worldview will be a collective society that dismisses individual
freedom, creativity, and personal fulfillment as outmoded egoistic "static
patterns".
We're halfway there already, aren't we Platt?
Best regards and higher hopes for betterness,
Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
